Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
So in other words 'screw the poor'. I thought that was already happening.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:

---

They're paying MORE than they're making? Really? Show me which people are paying more than 100% of their income in income taxes.

---

As a %, the 'rich' are paying a larger part of the tax burden

Quote:

---

The Numbers Are In, Again – The Rich Pay More Than Their “Fair Share”

* Latest IRS Data Shows that Wealthier Americans’ Portion of Taxes Actually Exceeds Their Portion of Income

In their never-ending campaign to increase taxes, those on the left endlessly allege that wealthier Americans don’t pay their “fair share” in taxes.

There’s only one problem: the exact opposite is true.

When one compares the portion of taxes paid by Americans of various income brackets to their corresponding portion of the nation’s income earned, wealthier Americans actually pay more than their fair share.

And once again, the latest Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) numbers prove that. This month, the IRS’s income statistics division released its latest data comparing the amount of income earned by various segments of the income ladder against the amount of taxes paid by those same segments.

And what do they reveal?

According to the statistics, the richest 1% of American taxpayers (those earning above $389,000) earned 22% of the nation’s reported income. But their share of the nation’s income taxes was 40%. In other words, the wealthiest 1% of Americans’ income tax payments are almost twice as much as their “fair share".

http://www.cfif.org/htdocs/freedomline/current/in_our_opinion/The-Numb
ers-Are-In-Again-The-Rich-Pay-More-Than-Their-Fair-Share.htm

---

* article from July, 2008.





" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

---

Quote:

---

the richest 1% of American taxpayers (those earning above $389,000) earned 22% of the nation’s reported income. But their share of the nation’s income taxes was 40%.

---

Quote:

---

OUR leaders have asked for “shared sacrifice.” But when they did the asking, they spared me. I checked with my mega-rich friends to learn what pain they were expecting. They, too, were left untouched.

While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks. Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labors but are allowed to classify our income as “carried interest,” thereby getting a bargain 15 percent tax rate. Others own stock index futures for 10 minutes and have 60 percent of their gain taxed at 15 percent, as if they’d been long-term investors.

These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It’s nice to have friends in high places.

Last year my federal tax bill — the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf — was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.

If you make money with money, as some of my super-rich friends do, your percentage may be a bit lower than mine. But if you earn money from a job, your percentage will surely exceed mine — most likely by a lot.

To understand why, you need to examine the sources of government revenue. Last year about 80 percent of these revenues came from personal income taxes and payroll taxes. The mega-rich pay income taxes at a rate of 15 percent on most of their earnings but pay practically nothing in payroll taxes. It’s a different story for the middle class: typically, they fall into the 15 percent and 25 percent income tax brackets, and then are hit with heavy payroll taxes to boot.

Back in the 1980s and 1990s, tax rates for the rich were far higher, and my percentage rate was in the middle of the pack. According to a theory I sometimes hear, I should have thrown a fit and refused to invest because of the elevated tax rates on capital gains and dividends.

I didn’t refuse, nor did others. I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone — not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 — shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. And to those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation.

Since 1992, the I.R.S. has compiled data from the returns of the 400 Americans reporting the largest income. In 1992, the top 400 had aggregate taxable income of $16.9 billion and paid federal taxes of 29.2 percent on that sum. In 2008, the aggregate income of the highest 400 had soared to $90.9 billion — a staggering $227.4 million on average — but the rate paid had fallen to 21.5 percent.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Yeah, wow, the USA has had what is called a "progressive" income tax structure for... oh, about as long as it's had taxes... and the teabaggers have just discovered it? And are reacting like this is some sort of recently-imposed librul horror?

So, let's say for the moment that the rich really DO pay more taxes than the middle class, as a percentage of their income. (They don't, but assume that they do.)

SO WHAT?

Explain the problem. Try to get past "It's not fair" because I think we've heard that... oh, about a zillion times by now.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Yeah, wow, the USA has had what is called a "progressive" income tax structure for... oh, about as long as it's had taxes... and the teabaggers have just discovered it? And are reacting like this is some sort of recently-imposed librul horror?

So, let's say for the moment that the rich really DO pay more taxes than the middle class, as a percentage of their income. (They don't, but assume that they do.)

SO WHAT?

Explain the problem. Try to get past "It's not fair" because I think we've heard that... oh, about a zillion times by now.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Kwickie -

Nice dodge and evade tactic.

Our 'leaders' talk about shared sacrifice, but what they really want is to divide us and put the blame for all that's wrong right now on the folks who had nothing to DO with the problem in the first place.

The 'rich' didn't cause this mess, and taxing them, blaming them, won't FIX the problem either.

---

Quote:

---

Kwickie, don't be such an obtuse dick. Seriously. Even if I worded my position poorly, it's not LYING.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:

Quote:

---

OUR leaders have asked for “shared sacrifice.” But when they did the asking, they spared me. I checked with my mega-rich friends to learn what pain they were expecting. They, too, were left untouched.

While the poor and middle class fight for us in Afghanistan, and while most Americans struggle to make ends meet, we mega-rich continue to get our extraordinary tax breaks. Some of us are investment managers who earn billions from our daily labors but are allowed to classify our income as “carried interest,” thereby getting a bargain 15 percent tax rate. Others own stock index futures for 10 minutes and have 60 percent of their gain taxed at 15 percent, as if they’d been long-term investors.

These and other blessings are showered upon us by legislators in Washington who feel compelled to protect us, much as if we were spotted owls or some other endangered species. It’s nice to have friends in high places.

Last year my federal tax bill — the income tax I paid, as well as payroll taxes paid by me and on my behalf — was $6,938,744. That sounds like a lot of money. But what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income — and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.

If you make money with money, as some of my super-rich friends do, your percentage may be a bit lower than mine. But if you earn money from a job, your percentage will surely exceed mine — most likely by a lot.

To understand why, you need to examine the sources of government revenue. Last year about 80 percent of these revenues came from personal income taxes and payroll taxes. The mega-rich pay income taxes at a rate of 15 percent on most of their earnings but pay practically nothing in payroll taxes. It’s a different story for the middle class: typically, they fall into the 15 percent and 25 percent income tax brackets, and then are hit with heavy payroll taxes to boot.

Back in the 1980s and 1990s, tax rates for the rich were far higher, and my percentage rate was in the middle of the pack. According to a theory I sometimes hear, I should have thrown a fit and refused to invest because of the elevated tax rates on capital gains and dividends.

I didn’t refuse, nor did others. I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone — not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 — shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. And to those who argue that higher rates hurt job creation, I would note that a net of nearly 40 million jobs were added between 1980 and 2000. You know what’s happened since then: lower tax rates and far lower job creation.

Since 1992, the I.R.S. has compiled data from the returns of the 400 Americans reporting the largest income. In 1992, the top 400 had aggregate taxable income of $16.9 billion and paid federal taxes of 29.2 percent on that sum. In 2008, the aggregate income of the highest 400 had soared to $90.9 billion — a staggering $227.4 million on average — but the rate paid had fallen to 21.5 percent.

---

Full article at


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich
.html




"Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservatives." - John Stuart Mill

---

Quote:

---

Seems to me your tactic of blaming the poor isn't doing a great job of fixing things, either.

---

Quote:

---

How is this dodging and evading, Rappy? Is it "dodging and evading" because it completely refutes your claims? It seems to be perfectly on-point and on topic to me. It clearly addresses the claims you've made here and elsewhere, and puts lie to the myth that the rich are paying "2x's" more than their "fair share".

---

Quote:

---

The Wall St bail out ? I was against it as well, but in all honesty, it's worked. The banks which got loaned that money have in large part paid it back and with interests, as well. So, bitch about 'Wall Street' all you want, but they only did what our govt allowed them to do.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

And thus we have the class warfare game.

Those who "have" the most are paying the most. Already. More so than they're making.

It's not an issue of cutting taxes more, but cutting spending. Keep the tax rates as is, and cutting spending, will go a long way to help the economy recover.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by m52nickerson:

It is not class warfare it is reality.

---

Quote:

---

Nor is it about fairness.

---

Quote:

---

Oh and they aren't paying more then they are making.

---

Quote:

---

Now explain to my how cutting government spending, which is a large portion of GDP right now, is going to help the economy.

---

Quote:

---

We've also heard Rappy claim that life isn't fair - but he seems to think it SHOULD BE, at least when it comes to how much people pay in taxes. Not so much when it comes to jobs, healthcare, regulations, how the poor are treated, or the unemployed, elderly, or disabled.

---

Quote:

---

It doesn't remotely refute my claim, in the least. You're confusing the issue of tax RATES ( which I'd question as to how they arrive at that # ) vs the actual tax BURDEN, or the amount of $ , by %, which is taken in by the Federal govt.... The top earners making 22% of the income, are paying 40% of the taxes.

---

Quote:

---

SignyM wrote:
Saturday, October 15, 2011 07:24

Quote:

---

We've also heard Rappy claim that life isn't fair - but he seems to think it SHOULD BE, at least when it comes to how much people pay in taxes. Not so much when it comes to jobs, healthcare, regulations, how the poor are treated, or the unemployed, elderly, or disabled.

---

Any comment to this, rappy?

---

Quote:

---

the OWS crowd is nothing but smelly, filthy noise.

---

Quote:

---

equating the capital gains tax to the income tax.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1kiki:
You mean when I am spending money on water, food, clothes, and shelter I'm NOT making an investment that I can only HOPE will pay off with an income?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
If you were to look at Federal income tax rates and tax burden as a chart, you would find that income taxes are relatively low for the bottom half (about 3%), rise sharply as income rises above $50,000, but drops significantly when incomes top about a million dollars, and the TAX BURDEN drops correspondingly. The highest tax burden actually falls on households making between $150,000 to about $500,000 dollars per year, not on the mega-wealthy.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
It's 100% class warfare, and it's by design.

---

Quote:

---

I've addressed capital gains tax versus income tax. I've also addressed corporate tax versus income tax. Frankly, I see no reason to make a distinction- logically, ethically, or economically.

If corporations are people, why aren't people taxed like corporations? If a lower capital gains tax only means that some people can keep more of their speculative gains, how is that helping the economy?

Why should we create a structure which makes some people rich, and others poorer? Why do we reward speculation more than work, or even invention? Indeed, what is the economy FOR... what is its ultimate GOAL... if not to provide a better living for EVERYONE, not just for some? And if the economy is structured for the benefit of only a very few... 0.0001% ... what reason do I have to support it?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:

Well, it's not fair, and we're seeing the natural result of this idiotic tax system. You have an ever increasing number of citizens who are paying less and less into the system, while the richest continue to get squeezed, more and more.

Slavery lasted for a while too, before folks figured out it should be done away with, too. Just because something's been done a certain way for a long time, doesn't make it right, or 'fair'.


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

---

Quote:

---

We could do all of that without corporations, and we would be better off for it.-Signy
How is that?_nick

---

Quote:

---

Fine, it is class warfare. That just means we will win, since there are more poor and middle class

---

Quote:

---

Oh, wait most rich people aren't against the idea so it is more like left - right warfare.

---

Quote:

---

Yes, the capital gains tax which is lower then the income tax a lower brackets, that is about fairness. That is also not the income tax rate. You have to read all the words.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Most wealthy didn't get it by working hard, they inherited it, because wealth, like power often leads to greater wealth and greater power, and is passed on through generations. So what is you problem with constantly defending those who have the most of everything and targeting those who have the least?

---

Quote:

---

Where'd you get THAT nugget of information ? Because that's not the information I have

---

Quote:

---

I've addressed capital gains tax versus income tax. I've also addressed corporate tax versus income tax. Frankly, I see no reason to make a distinction- logically, ethically, or economically.

If corporations are people, why aren't people taxed like corporations? If a lower capital gains tax only means that some people can keep more of their speculative gains, how is that helping the economy?

Why should we create a structure which makes some people rich, and others poorer? Why do we reward speculation more than work, or even invention? Indeed, what is the economy FOR... what is its ultimate GOAL... if not to provide a better living for EVERYONE, not just for some? And if the economy is structured for the benefit of only a very few... 0.0001% ... what reason do I have to support it?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
I took a quick look at the tables. According to them, the maximum tax rate is at about 2 million.

---

Quote:

---

Above that, tax rates DROP.

---

Quote:

---

Like I said, the largest amount of taxes paid is by the $100,000 to $500,000 group, which makes up 21% of total income and 45% of taxes... they pay into the tax system roughly twice (2X) their relative income.

---

Quote:

---

By comparison, the remainder at the top account for about 19% of total income and about 30% of taxes... in other words, they contribute only about 1.6X into the tax system relative to their income.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Geezer and rappy defend the ultrawealthy viscerally, as if they were being personally attacked, and I doubt either of them really are that rich. And if you ask them "why" they feel that way they really don't seem to know.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
OMG geezer, I can't believe you're arguing which column to use!

---

Quote:

---

You think the tax codes for income and cap gains should be the same? Fine, then I suppose you'll join me in supporting Cain's 9-9-9 plan, or even better, the FAIR Tax.

---

Quote:

---

Sure, those with 'old money' tend to keep it, but you'd kinda expect that, right ? However, you seem to want to ignore the work and effort many of the 'rich' put forth in order to get to where they are.

---

Quote:

---

Why should we create a structure which makes some people rich, and others poorer? Why do we reward speculation more than work, or even invention? Indeed, what is the economy FOR... what is its ultimate GOAL... if not to provide a better living for EVERYONE, not just for some? And if the economy is structured for the benefit of only a very few... 0.0001% ... what reason do I have to support it?

---

Quote:

---

I'm just here to correct the incorrect figures folks tend to fling around with such abandon, as in my response to your post above.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:
Geezer and rappy defend the ultrawealthy viscerally, as if they were being personally attacked, and I doubt either of them really are that rich. And if you ask them "why" they feel that way they really don't seem to know.

---

Quote:

---

It's about freedom.

---

Quote:

---

yet come after ME when all I do is ask for some citation. It's MY position that, here in the US, most millionaires are MADE, and not born into their money.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SignyM:

Quote:

---

I'm just here to correct the incorrect figures folks tend to fling around with such abandon, as in my response to your post above.

---

Oh, indeed.

So then, Geezer, you're using the wrong figures, which are discrepant from the figures that MOST economists use when calculating tax burden.

---

Quote:

---

Oh, really? Where'd you get THAT nugget of information ?

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by AURaptor:
Which, as I said, is by design. The leaders of the Left know that there are far more moochers than there are producers, so they're hoping to instill unrest and a mob mentality.

---

Quote:

---

I asked where magonsdaughter got the info which claims that MOST of the wealthy are born, not self made.

---