Article 15
Dr. House slayer
- Jul 4, 2008
- 24,673
- 4,916
- 183
Thanks for the link Art. This one has some data I can sink my teeth into.
But that really has nothing to do with a thread on income tax.
What ever income the wealth make is taxed at the highest rate.
And 50% of the country pays nothing, but demand that everyone else pay more.
And Obama isn't talking about taxing billionaires, or multi-millionaires...the liberals want to tax people and small businesses that make $250,000.
Are they the 1%ers?HELL NO.
So all the wealth crap is bullshit.
A red herring.
How is that fair.
Americans Making More than $250,000 | FactCheck.orgWe put the question to the Tax Policy Center, which has a computer model of the tax system similar to the ones used by the Treasury Department and Congress’ Joint Committee on Taxation.
For simplicity, we’ll just focus on the over-$250,000 group. Those reporting adjusted gross income of more than $250,000 to the IRS are projected to make up 2 percent of households next year, when the new president will take office. Those folks will earn 24.1 percent of all income, and pay 43.6 percent of all personal federal income taxes, the Tax Policy Center figures. Under either Obama or Clinton, they might pay even more.
1% of the wealth.
See that's what happens when you jump back and forth between concepts in the same thread.
You all are talking about wealth, not income.
But now it's about income, not wealth.
How is taxing folks making less than a couple million dollars going to change the wealth distribution?
That was your point...the point of posting the links on wealth disparity.
So make up your mind...is it about wealth...or income.
You are splitting hairs with this "jumping back and forth" when 250K+ a year is the top 2% of earners.
But the reason why I bothered to post the links about wealth disparity was because you were doubting the link the other guy posted.
That said, if you tax the higher income earners more by definition it will lower the disparity in wealth distribution.