0
rushmc

Only The Rich Pay Taxes....

Recommended Posts

The left continuously says the Bush tax cuts favor the "Rich"!!

I posted this on another tread and was totally ignored so I thought I would start a thread on the topic.

So, I areee the tax ciuts favored the rich, why??
Because, THE RICH IS WHO PAYS THE TAXES!!

Here is where the data came from for the 2003 Calendar year

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/03in05tr.xls

This is the latest data for calendar year 2003 just released in October 2005 by the Internal Revenue Service. The share of total income taxes paid by the top 1% of wage earners rose to 34.27% from 33.71% in 2002. Their income share (not just wages) rose from 16.12% to 16.77%. However,
their average tax rate actually dropped from 27.25% down to 24.31%

Think of it this way: less than 3-1/2 dollars out of every $100 paid in income taxes in the United States is paid by someone in the bottom 50% of wage earners. Are the top half millionaires? Noooo, more like "thousandaires." The top 50% were those individuals or couples filing jointly who earned $29,019 and up in 2003. (The top 1% earned $295,495-plus.) Americans who want to are continuing to improve their lives, and those who don't want to, aren't. Here are the wage earners in each category and the percentages they pay:
The top 1% pay over a third, 34.27% of all income taxes. (Up from 2003: 33.71%) The top 5% pay 54.36% of all income taxes (Up from 2002: 53.80%). The top 10% pay 65.84% (Up from 2002: 65.73%). The top 25% pay 83.88% (Down from 2002: 83.90%). The top 50% pay 96.54% (Up from 2002: 96.50%). The bottom 50%? They pay a paltry 3.46% of all income taxes (Down from 2002: 3.50%). The top 1% is paying nearly ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%! And who earns what? The top 1% earns 16.77% of all income (2002: 16.12%). The top 5% earns 31.18% of all the income (2002: 30.55%). The top 10% earns 42.36% of all the income (2002: 41.77%); the top 25% earns 64.86% of all the income (2002: 64.37%) , and the top 50% earns 86.01% (2002: 85.77%) of all the income.
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If a flat tax where imposed the rich will would still be paying a disproportinate amount of tax. If everyone paid the exact same amount in taxes. Places like Mexico and Canada could own us. The rich( of which I'm one according to my taxes) pay more because they benefit from the RIGHT to live and prosper in this society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do feel that I get a pretty good value for my taxes....This is a pretty inexpensive and easy country to live in.

If you are hurt bad, there will be a helicopter to get you to the hospital....Our infrastructure (rail, highways, air) are pretty good...Yes there is traffic in cities but the interstate sys is bad ass....Food and gas are cheap....Housing inexpensive almost everywhere.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The top 1% pay ...34.27% of all income taxes.... The top 1% earns 16.77% of all income.

If we table out this taxpaid vs income down the line, then the story makes more sense. But it's always stacked up wrong.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can quote percentages until they start coming out of your ying-yank and it won't make a difference. The people most effect by taxation are the middle class (which is the vast majority of the population). Sure people living below the poverty line don't pay a lot of tax and sure the ultra rich pay a lot of tax when we're talking total dollars. But their respective taxation levels don't really effect either group (keeping in mind that any taxation sure doesn't help the people living below the poverty line). Taxation to the ultra rich is nothing more than annoyance. But they've got plenty of money and it really doesn't effect them, It's the ever decreasing middle class where taxation has the most negative influenence. It's getting to the point where salaries can not keep up with the cost of living and people just can't get ahead any more let alone just keep up.

But remember it's not how much or how little you make that counts. It's how much you keep after you've factored in your spending and taxation levels. But in this consumer society, that message is lost on too many people.


Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You confuse "income" with "wealth". The rich are wealthy, but may not have a lot of "income" to declare. I have a way above average income and pay a lot of income tax but I'm certainly not rich.

As one very wealthy lady once said, "Taxes are for the little people".
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

It's the ever decreasing middle class where taxation has the most negative influenence. It's getting to the point where salaries can not keep up with the cost of living and people just can't get ahead any more let alone just keep up.



i aggree with you that its the middle class that is most effected by taxes, but for years i've heard about this incredible shrinking middle class. i don't buy it. everywhere i go i see new housing developement either just built or in various stages of construction. for the most part, these are three and four bedroom homes, not projects and not mansions. these days most families have at least one car, if not two. most people have computers, ipods, tvs, and various other non essencial devices. it is my observation that the middle class is not just surviving, but thriving. there are two things that can derail this, taxes and medical insurance.


"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

there are two things that can derail this, taxes and medical insurance.



Don't forget to add consumer debt to the equation. The economy is cyclical (we're currently still on an up) and the next recession could do a few of those families in.


Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

but for years i've heard about this incredible shrinking middle class.



that's because 'they' keep redefining what the filthy rich are. I think it's now anyone making over minimum wage.

The greedy bastards.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote



You confuse "income" with "wealth". The rich are wealthy,



would you tax wealth? (i.e., would you take money that already was taxed the first time?)

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

would you tax wealth? (i.e., would you take money that already was taxed the first time?)



Absolutely not. >:(

But it's happening. With rising property assesments, municiple governments are taking more and more tax each year into their coffers without offering very much in return only because of the increase in property taxes due to real estate speculation. In some places it's getting to the point where some people (mainly those on fixed incomes) can no longer afford to stay in their homes due to the value of their property rising. Some will say these people need only sell their property to get away from the rising municiple taxation, but where are they going to go and where will they live?

The cost of living is out of control in this new city (Vancouver BC) that I temporarily call home. Between high housing costs, the high income tax levels, the high property tax assessments and high consumer tax on everything except the kitchen sink (no that's taxed as well), how can people get ahead let alone stay in the game?


Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In some places it's getting to the point where some people (mainly those on fixed incomes) can no longer afford to stay in their homes due to the value of their property rising.



these are very sad situations. in all instances i've heard of, its been a retired couple or worse yet w retired widow that own there property free and clear but still can't afford to pay rent to the government. it seems to me that it would be very easy to provide a property tax exemption for those over a certain age who reside on said property.


"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any time you provide exemtions there is a long list of people looking to take advantage of it. Add in an exemption that if you are over 70 and your name is on the deed and its your primary residence then its tax exempt? You'll have people moving their parents into their 4-5 bedroom brand new houses and putting their name on the title to get the tax exempt status. The whole "must live in a house for X years" clause on real estate income tax exemptions was created to keep people from flipping homes every 3-4 months and never paying any taxes.

Its a good concept, but it would be a nightmare to try and write to close all the loopholes.
Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do feel that I get a pretty good value for my taxes....This is a pretty inexpensive and easy country to live in.


Things must be better in your neck of the woods, than it is in Connecticut. Taxes here are outrageous.


If you are hurt bad, there will be a helicopter to get you to the hospital....Our infrastructure (rail, highways, air) are pretty good...Yes there is traffic in cities but the interstate sys is bad ass....Food and gas are cheap....Housing inexpensive almost everywhere.....


Helicopter service is good here, but that's probably because the interstate system is abysmal. Food & gas are probably like other parts of the country, but housing costs have tripled here in 5 years. That's great if you owned a home prior to 2001, but it's now way overpriced for what you get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote



You confuse "income" with "wealth". The rich are wealthy,



would you tax wealth? (i.e., would you take money that already was taxed the first time?)



Kallend just pointed out the fallacy in rushmc's argument. I didn't see any suggestion of taxing wealth. Where did you get that idea?

However, your question is equally fallacious, it's all taxed multiple times anyway (income is used to purchase stuff (sales) which pays the employees (income) or becomes corporate profit which pays dividends... with tax due at every step of the way. This multiple taxation argument is a totally bogus right wing myth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you are right that it would be a pain in the ass and people would take advantage of it. that doesn't mean we shouldn't do something about it. i have a problem with property taxes anyway. i don't feel one should have to continue to pay for something they've already bought and payed for. if someone has been a productive enough member of society and has accumulated some assets before retirement, we can at least lat them keep what they've earned. don't forget that we'll be there some day too.


"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote



You confuse "income" with "wealth". The rich are wealthy,



would you tax wealth? (i.e., would you take money that already was taxed the first time?)



Kallend just pointed out the fallacy in rushmc's argument. I didn't see any suggestion of taxing wealth. Where did you get that idea?

However, your question is equally fallacious, it's all taxed multiple times anyway (income is used to purchase stuff (sales) which pays the employees (income) or becomes corporate profit which pays dividends... with tax due at every step of the way. This multiple taxation argument is a totally bogus right wing myth.



Right wing myth??? Talk about running around with eyes closed!!

How about the death tax. All of the dollars that remain in an estate have been tax mulitple times. Income taxes and then capital gains taxes and then, with what you have left you get nailed with sales taxes and then, after you die, the sobs tax the dollars again to make sure some one can not benifit from your work and savings.:S

Yah, it's a f*&%ing myth alright......
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote



You confuse "income" with "wealth". The rich are wealthy,



would you tax wealth? (i.e., would you take money that already was taxed the first time?)



I paid my "property tax" on March 1. Thank you, but I didn't need the reminder.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote



You confuse "income" with "wealth". The rich are wealthy,



would you tax wealth? (i.e., would you take money that already was taxed the first time?)



Kallend just pointed out the fallacy in rushmc's argument. I didn't see any suggestion of taxing wealth. Where did you get that idea?

However, your question is equally fallacious, it's all taxed multiple times anyway (income is used to purchase stuff (sales) which pays the employees (income) or becomes corporate profit which pays dividends... with tax due at every step of the way. This multiple taxation argument is a totally bogus right wing myth.



Right wing myth??? Talk about running around with eyes closed!!

How about the death tax. All of the dollars that remain in an estate have been tax mulitple times. Income taxes and then capital gains taxes and then, with what you have left you get nailed with sales taxes and then, after you die, the sobs tax the dollars again to make sure some one can not benifit from your work and savings.:S

Yah, it's a f*&%ing myth alright......



Whoosh. The myth is that there's something inherently wrong with a wealth tax just because it can be described as double taxation. All your money (and mine) has already been taxed a whole bunch of times as it circulates in the economy, so why whine about a wealth tax?

The fact is, the data you quote has nothing to do with who is rich or poor, it has to do with who has the most unsheltered income. These are not the same set.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote



You confuse "income" with "wealth". The rich are wealthy,



would you tax wealth? (i.e., would you take money that already was taxed the first time?)



Kallend just pointed out the fallacy in rushmc's argument. I didn't see any suggestion of taxing wealth. Where did you get that idea?

However, your question is equally fallacious, it's all taxed multiple times anyway (income is used to purchase stuff (sales) which pays the employees (income) or becomes corporate profit which pays dividends... with tax due at every step of the way. This multiple taxation argument is a totally bogus right wing myth.



Right wing myth??? Talk about running around with eyes closed!!

How about the death tax. All of the dollars that remain in an estate have been tax mulitple times. Income taxes and then capital gains taxes and then, with what you have left you get nailed with sales taxes and then, after you die, the sobs tax the dollars again to make sure some one can not benifit from your work and savings.:S

Yah, it's a f*&%ing myth alright......



Whoosh. The myth is that there's something inherently wrong with a wealth tax just because it can be described as double taxation. All your money (and mine) has already been taxed a whole bunch of times as it circulates in the economy, so why whine about a wealth tax?

The fact is, the data you quote has nothing to do with who is rich or poor, it has to do with who has the most unsheltered income. These are not the same set.



Whoosh right back to you.

Taxes are taxes. They take and spend too much no matter how "you" choose to qualify it.

Teddy Kenedy had most of his family's money out of country and pay very little taxes himself yet, he speaks of tax cuts for the Rich!!! I don't care if someone that makes more money than me pays more or less taxes!!!>:( I only care abut what I pay but, the left can't think that way because they loose the class envy argument about 'Tax cuts for the rick" argument.

A created argument to keep voters. So which is worse?? Scare tactics you claim the right uses or bold face BS?

WWWHHHHHHOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSHHHHHHH:S
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I don't care if someone that makes more money than me pays more or less taxes!!!>:( I only care abut what I pay but, the left can't think that way because they loose the class envy argument about 'Tax cuts for the rick" argument.
:S



So it's all about you. Typical Republican.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The bottom 50%? They pay a paltry 3.46% of all income taxes (Down from 2002: 3.50%). The top 5% pay 54.36% of all income taxes .



The Bottom 50% earn less than 30k per year. The top 5% roughly earn more than 200k per year.

If the top 5% picked up the income tax for the bottom 50%, that would add 5k per household in spending power to the bottom 50%. That would have a far more positive benefit to the econmy than giving the wealthy minority a small tax break. As someone in the bottom 50% I can tell you that money would make the difference between renting an apt and a mortgage on a house.
"Buttons aren't toys." - Trillian
Ken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0