Avg small business earns 45k - many would even be in the 47%!

[Skull Pilot]

You didn't. Nor did I say you did.



Awesome. Because we want more federal debt.

You also said people should pay a minum of $250 a year. Right up there in the quotes. Read it. That means someone with $1 in income pays %25,000. Do the math.



We should treat everyone exactly the same?
Sounds like communism to me. Though I would doubt you'd want billionaires to be treated "exactly the same" as homeless people in most situations.

I did not say people should pay a minimum I said a minimum payment would not force people to go on welfare.

It would if they come up $250 short for food and rent.

And a 10% flat tax on all income would increase revenues over the current system not decrease them.

There's no empirical evidence that your statement is correct. The theoretical basis is a bit shaky as well. Are we to really believe average incomes would increase by two fold if taxes were cut to 10%? Because that's about what would be needed for tax revenues to actually increase under a 10% tax rate. I seems like maybe you haven't thought this one through. I don't think its possible for average incomes to double even if you eliminated taxation altogether!

All you need to do is look at a given tax year note the revenue from income taxes then look up the gross income of the country for that same year and multiply it by .1.

For example.

Let's use 2009

Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data | Tax Foundation

AGI in 2009 was 7.8 trillion
total income tax revenue was 865 billion
an effective overall tax rate of 11.2%

Now the total gross income in 2009 was 11.85 trillion

Total Personal Income U.S. and All States
multiply that by .1 and the total tax revenue would have been 1.18 trillion

Last time i checked 1.18 trillion was larger than 865 billion

any questions?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

I did not say people should pay a minimum I said a minimum payment would not force people to go on welfare.

It would if they come up $250 short for food and rent.

And a 10% flat tax on all income would increase revenues over the current system not decrease them.

There's no empirical evidence that your statement is correct. The theoretical basis is a bit shaky as well. Are we to really believe average incomes would increase by two fold if taxes were cut to 10%? Because that's about what would be needed for tax revenues to actually increase under a 10% tax rate. I seems like maybe you haven't thought this one through. I don't think its possible for average incomes to double even if you eliminated taxation altogether!

All you need to do is look at a given tax year note the revenue from income taxes then look up the gross income of the country for that same year and multiply it by .1.

For example.

Let's use 2009

Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data | Tax Foundation

AGI in 2009 was 7.8 trillion
total income tax revenue was 865 billion
an effective overall tax rate of 11.2%

Now the total gross income in 2009 was 11.85 trillion

Total Personal Income U.S. and All States
multiply that by .1 and the total tax revenue would have been 1.18 trillion

Last time i checked 1.18 trillion was larger than 865 billion

any questions?

Yeah. You're a conservative, yet you propose raising taxes. How is that?

 

[Skull Pilot]

It would if they come up $250 short for food and rent.




There's no empirical evidence that your statement is correct. The theoretical basis is a bit shaky as well. Are we to really believe average incomes would increase by two fold if taxes were cut to 10%? Because that's about what would be needed for tax revenues to actually increase under a 10% tax rate. I seems like maybe you haven't thought this one through. I don't think its possible for average incomes to double even if you eliminated taxation altogether!

All you need to do is look at a given tax year note the revenue from income taxes then look up the gross income of the country for that same year and multiply it by .1.

For example.

Let's use 2009

Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data | Tax Foundation

AGI in 2009 was 7.8 trillion
total income tax revenue was 865 billion
an effective overall tax rate of 11.2%

Now the total gross income in 2009 was 11.85 trillion

Total Personal Income U.S. and All States
multiply that by .1 and the total tax revenue would have been 1.18 trillion

Last time i checked 1.18 trillion was larger than 865 billion

any questions?

Yeah. You're a conservative, yet you propose raising taxes. How is that?

You say I am a conservative. I have never identified myself as such.

And a flat tax would not raise taxes the lowest tax bracket is already at 10%. People would just have to actually pay it rather than getting a pass with all kinds of bullshit deductions and tax credits.

If you wanted to level fund income tax the flat tax could be as low as 7-8% but that would do nothing to solve our debt and deficit problems now would it?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

All you need to do is look at a given tax year note the revenue from income taxes then look up the gross income of the country for that same year and multiply it by .1.

For example.

Let's use 2009

Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data | Tax Foundation

AGI in 2009 was 7.8 trillion
total income tax revenue was 865 billion
an effective overall tax rate of 11.2%

Now the total gross income in 2009 was 11.85 trillion

Total Personal Income U.S. and All States
multiply that by .1 and the total tax revenue would have been 1.18 trillion

Last time i checked 1.18 trillion was larger than 865 billion

any questions?

Yeah. You're a conservative, yet you propose raising taxes. How is that?

You say I am a conservative. I have never identified myself as such.

And a flat tax would not raise taxes the lowest tax bracket is already at 10%.

But you just said it would. In fact you checked and verified that "1.18 trillion was larger than 865 billion". If you lower my rate but increase my taxable income such that I'd pay more - that's a tax HIKE you dumbass.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yeah. You're a conservative, yet you propose raising taxes. How is that?

You say I am a conservative. I have never identified myself as such.

And a flat tax would not raise taxes the lowest tax bracket is already at 10%.

But you just said it would. In fact you checked and verified that "1.18 trillion was larger than 865 billion". If you lower my rate but increase my taxable income such that I'd pay more - that's a tax HIKE you dumbass.

I said it would increase revenue not increase tax rates. The tax rates would just be enforced as they should be.

And what's the problem with raising more revenue? Isn't that what you keep saying is needed?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

You say I am a conservative. I have never identified myself as such.

And a flat tax would not raise taxes the lowest tax bracket is already at 10%.

But you just said it would. In fact you checked and verified that "1.18 trillion was larger than 865 billion". If you lower my rate but increase my taxable income such that I'd pay more - that's a tax HIKE you dumbass.

I said it would increase revenue not increase tax rates. The tax rates would just be enforced as they should be.

And what's the problem with raising more revenue? Isn't that what you keep saying is needed?

LOL! Sure it won't increase the tax rate - if you CHANGE HOW THE RATE IS CALCULATED. Fucks sakes you're being stupid now. The average American would pay MORE TAXES under your proposal - that's a TAX RAISE.

Hey - how about we calculate taxes based on 10 X your gross income? Then we could lower the rate to 1%! Can you imagine! A 1% tax rate!

 

[007]

Everyone with an income regardless of its source should have to pay income tax.

Totally agree. What this country needs is a flat tax, but don't expect that to happen any time soon. The big business lobbyist will see to that... politicians for sale.

 

[Skull Pilot]

But you just said it would. In fact you checked and verified that "1.18 trillion was larger than 865 billion". If you lower my rate but increase my taxable income such that I'd pay more - that's a tax HIKE you dumbass.

I said it would increase revenue not increase tax rates. The tax rates would just be enforced as they should be.

And what's the problem with raising more revenue? Isn't that what you keep saying is needed?

LOL! Sure it won't increase the tax rate - if you CHANGE HOW THE RATE IS CALCULATED. Fucks sakes you're being stupid now. The average American would pay MORE TAXES under your proposal - that's a TAX RAISE.

Hey - how about we calculate taxes based on 10 X your gross income? Then we could lower the rate to 1%! Can you imagine! A 1% tax rate!

What's wrong with treating all income the same? We've been treating different types and different amounts of income differently and it's not working very well is it?

And it's AGI that's analogous to your ridiculous example. Subjective deductions, subjective tax credits, refundable tax credits etc ad nauseum are what has got us into this mess.

And I thought you said we do need to raise taxes now you're saying we don't?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

I said it would increase revenue not increase tax rates. The tax rates would just be enforced as they should be.

And what's the problem with raising more revenue? Isn't that what you keep saying is needed?

LOL! Sure it won't increase the tax rate - if you CHANGE HOW THE RATE IS CALCULATED. Fucks sakes you're being stupid now. The average American would pay MORE TAXES under your proposal - that's a TAX RAISE.

Hey - how about we calculate taxes based on 10 X your gross income? Then we could lower the rate to 1%! Can you imagine! A 1% tax rate!

What's wrong with treating all income the same? We've been treating different types and different amounts of income differently and it's not working very well is it?

And it's AGI that's analogous to your ridiculous example. Subjective deductions, subjective tax credits, refundable tax credits etc ad nauseum are what has got us into this mess.

And I thought you said we do need to raise taxes now you're saying we don't?

You're saying that we can lower tax rates not by decreasing the amount of money that people pay but simply by increasing the size of the denominator in the equation. That's true. Its also meaningless.

You're advocating for an increase in the total tax burden born by the People. Do you realize this or not? Under your proposal the average American would send more $$$ to Congress for the same income. That's a tax hike. You're changing how income would be defined for the purposes of assessing the income tax but that doesn't alter the fact that the total dollar value of the taxes paid would be more.

 

[Skull Pilot]

LOL! Sure it won't increase the tax rate - if you CHANGE HOW THE RATE IS CALCULATED. Fucks sakes you're being stupid now. The average American would pay MORE TAXES under your proposal - that's a TAX RAISE.

Hey - how about we calculate taxes based on 10 X your gross income? Then we could lower the rate to 1%! Can you imagine! A 1% tax rate!

What's wrong with treating all income the same? We've been treating different types and different amounts of income differently and it's not working very well is it?

And it's AGI that's analogous to your ridiculous example. Subjective deductions, subjective tax credits, refundable tax credits etc ad nauseum are what has got us into this mess.

And I thought you said we do need to raise taxes now you're saying we don't?

You're saying that we can lower tax rates not by decreasing the amount of money that people pay but simply by increasing the size of the denominator in the equation. That's true. Its also meaningless.

You're advocating for an increase in the total tax burden born by the People. Do you realize this or not? Under your proposal the average American would send more $$$ to Congress for the same income. That's a tax hike. You're changing how income would be defined for the purposes of assessing the income tax but that doesn't alter the fact that the total dollar value of the taxes paid would be more.

No I said we can keep the lowest tax bracket and get rid of the rest of them and tax gross income not some arbitrarily defined adjusted income.

And I thought it has been your opinion that more revenue needs to be raised have you changed your position?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The average small business owner clears about 45k.

Small Business Owner Salary - CBsalary


So many of the business owners on the lower side of that figure and who have children probably paid no net taxes last year. According to Romney they therefore have the victim mentality and want to be dependent on government.


Is it any wonder you assholes lost? If I'm a small business owner struggling to get by on 30k or so, and Romney says I've got a government dependency problem and that I have a victim mentality - all the while whining and moaning about businessmen making 8 X my profit having to pay a tiny bit more in taxes - who do you think I'd have voted for?

Do you know what average means?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

What's wrong with treating all income the same? We've been treating different types and different amounts of income differently and it's not working very well is it?

And it's AGI that's analogous to your ridiculous example. Subjective deductions, subjective tax credits, refundable tax credits etc ad nauseum are what has got us into this mess.

And I thought you said we do need to raise taxes now you're saying we don't?

You're saying that we can lower tax rates not by decreasing the amount of money that people pay but simply by increasing the size of the denominator in the equation. That's true. Its also meaningless.

You're advocating for an increase in the total tax burden born by the People. Do you realize this or not? Under your proposal the average American would send more $$$ to Congress for the same income. That's a tax hike. You're changing how income would be defined for the purposes of assessing the income tax but that doesn't alter the fact that the total dollar value of the taxes paid would be more.

No I said we can keep the lowest tax bracket and get rid of the rest of them and tax gross income not some arbitrarily defined adjusted income.

And I thought it has been your opinion that more revenue needs to be raised have you changed your position?

I'm glad you agree with me that we need to raise taxes! Welcome aboard!


Though I find it odd that you'd want to accomplish this by doing things like getting rid of the half self-employment tax deduction, the traditional IRA, and the deduction for jury pay remitted to the juror's employer!

 

[Avatar4321]

It really would be nice if you guys stopped lying about Romney's comment. The election is over. You don't have to lie any more. It's not going to do you any good whatsoever. You get no benefit out of it. Isn't the truth better?

Why continue to divide people? You won the election. Isn't this the time you should be trying to unite people behind your policies? And if you aren't going to try now, when are you going to try? Or do you think you can govern people by dividing, insulting them, and stirring them up into contention against you?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

It really would be nice if you guys stopped lying about Romney's comment. The election is over. You don't have to lie any more. It's not going to do you any good whatsoever. You get no benefit out of it. Isn't the truth better?

Why continue to divide people? You won the election. Isn't this the time you should be trying to unite people behind your policies? And if you aren't going to try now, when are you going to try? Or do you think you can govern people by dividing, insulting them, and stirring them up into contention against you?

We're not lying. This is what he said:

All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. And I mean, the president starts off with 48, 49, 48—he starts off with a huge number. These are people who pay no income tax.

Mitt Romney is saying that everyone who does not pay federal taxes "believe that they are victims". Thus if you are a welfare queen and you paid no federal taxes, Romney thinks that you believe you are a victim. But also - if you are a small businessman and you paid no federal taxes, Romney thinks that you believe you are a victim. If you are retired on a meager income after along life of hard work and pay no taxes, Romney says that you believe you are a victim. If you're fresh out of boot camp and pay no taxes because you make so little and have kids - Romney says you believe you're a victim. In fact he has lumped the retiree and the very small businessman or low ranking soldier with a family to support in with the welfare queen in his statement. He makes no qualification and the only way you can get to 47% is to include EVERYONE who paid no federal income tax.

 

[Avatar4321]

No. He isn't saying that at all. Which is why you should stop lying about it. You keep trying to include people who 1) Aren't dependent on government in your figure (like your example in this thread) & 2) don't believe themselves to be victims (like veterans, those who recieve social security, etc) & 3) don't believe the government is responsible for them. etc.

You are completely miscontruing what he said to delibrately mislead and divide people. And unfortunately, you are successful because there are alot of people who don't analyze what he actually said, but instead have an emotional reaction when they are told he thinks they are like this when it's not further from the truth. You are delibrately creating propaganda to mislead and divide people. And to what purpose?

The purpose two months ago was obvious. But now Obama has won the election. In order to get your policies through, you need to be building coalitions. Not dividing people through lies and propaganda. How does creating contention with propaganda get the people to back your policies?

Dividing people might win you elections. But it doesn't help you govern a nation. You've already sold your integrity to win the election. Shouldn't you at least try to get some back when you try to govern the nation?

 

[Skull Pilot]

You're saying that we can lower tax rates not by decreasing the amount of money that people pay but simply by increasing the size of the denominator in the equation. That's true. Its also meaningless.

You're advocating for an increase in the total tax burden born by the People. Do you realize this or not? Under your proposal the average American would send more $$$ to Congress for the same income. That's a tax hike. You're changing how income would be defined for the purposes of assessing the income tax but that doesn't alter the fact that the total dollar value of the taxes paid would be more.

No I said we can keep the lowest tax bracket and get rid of the rest of them and tax gross income not some arbitrarily defined adjusted income.

And I thought it has been your opinion that more revenue needs to be raised have you changed your position?

I'm glad you agree with me that we need to raise taxes! Welcome aboard!


Though I find it odd that you'd want to accomplish this by doing things like getting rid of the half self-employment tax deduction, the traditional IRA, and the deduction for jury pay remitted to the juror's employer!

The point of a flat tax is to keep the rate low and get rid of the deductions and other bullshit.

What's the sense giving deductions and then having a higher tax rate?

 

[Ravi]

The average small business owner clears about 45k.

Small Business Owner Salary - CBsalary


So many of the business owners on the lower side of that figure and who have children probably paid no net taxes last year. According to Romney they therefore have the victim mentality and want to be dependent on government.


Is it any wonder you assholes lost? If I'm a small business owner struggling to get by on 30k or so, and Romney says I've got a government dependency problem and that I have a victim mentality - all the while whining and moaning about businessmen making 8 X my profit having to pay a tiny bit more in taxes - who do you think I'd have voted for?

This is somewhat misleading. A business owner could pay herself $45K in salary and at the end of the year also have a profit of $100K, effectively earning $145,000 a year. The benefit of setting up a business in this manner is that even though you still have to pay income tax on the $100K profit, you don't have to pay SS & Medicare on it.

Don't pity small business owners, we get all kinds of tax breaks.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It really would be nice if you guys stopped lying about Romney's comment. The election is over. You don't have to lie any more. It's not going to do you any good whatsoever. You get no benefit out of it. Isn't the truth better?

Why continue to divide people? You won the election. Isn't this the time you should be trying to unite people behind your policies? And if you aren't going to try now, when are you going to try? Or do you think you can govern people by dividing, insulting them, and stirring them up into contention against you?

We're not lying. This is what he said:

All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what. And I mean, the president starts off with 48, 49, 48—he starts off with a huge number. These are people who pay no income tax.

Mitt Romney is saying that everyone who does not pay federal taxes "believe that they are victims". Thus if you are a welfare queen and you paid no federal taxes, Romney thinks that you believe you are a victim. But also - if you are a small businessman and you paid no federal taxes, Romney thinks that you believe you are a victim. If you are retired on a meager income after along life of hard work and pay no taxes, Romney says that you believe you are a victim. If you're fresh out of boot camp and pay no taxes because you make so little and have kids - Romney says you believe you're a victim. In fact he has lumped the retiree and the very small businessman or low ranking soldier with a family to support in with the welfare queen in his statement. He makes no qualification and the only way you can get to 47% is to include EVERYONE who paid no federal income tax.

What about the rest of his comment?

Oh, that's right, it was lost because the camera had problems, and the guy recording had to readjust it, and managed to do it without touching the camera.