Tax Burden of Top 1% Now Exceeds That of Bottom 95%

[Skull Pilot]

I'm always amazed at the gullibility of people who fall for cooked stats like this.
If you click on the link the first thing you see is they use AGI which means ADJUSTED Gross Income, which means not all income is counted. Second you notice payroll taxes are not included and thirdly unrealized Capital Gains are also not counted as income. So as a result, the income of the "top 1%" is grossly underestimated and the tax burden of the bottom % is also underestimated.

you can't count unrealized gains as income unless you also want to count unrealized losses as a write off.

Of course!

did you just pull that number out of your ass or do you have a link?

I always have a link!!!

SOI Tax Stats - 2004 Personal Wealth Tables
An estimated 2.7 million U.S. adults in 2004 had gross assets of $1.5 million or more. In total, these top wealth holders owned nearly $11.1 trillion in assets. After accounting for debts and mortgages of $850.1 billion, these individuals had a combined net worth of over $10.2 trillion.

2004????

And what is that 10 trillion worth now?

Jesus Christ a 5 year old table. Yeah pat yourself on the back for that one.

 

[edthecynic]

you can't count unrealized gains as income unless you also want to count unrealized losses as a write off.

Of course!



I always have a link!!!

SOI Tax Stats - 2004 Personal Wealth Tables
An estimated 2.7 million U.S. adults in 2004 had gross assets of $1.5 million or more. In total, these top wealth holders owned nearly $11.1 trillion in assets. After accounting for debts and mortgages of $850.1 billion, these individuals had a combined net worth of over $10.2 trillion.

2004????

And what is that 10 trillion worth now?

Jesus Christ a 5 year old table. Yeah pat yourself on the back for that one.

That IRS link is the most recent data released by the IRS, if it is not up to date enough for you whine to them, not to me.

 

[Andrew2382]

yes, cause we all know that no major economic things have happened in the past 5 years where that report is worth anything more then a piece of a paper to wipe your ass with

 

[Skull Pilot]

Of course!



I always have a link!!!

2004????

And what is that 10 trillion worth now?

Jesus Christ a 5 year old table. Yeah pat yourself on the back for that one.

That IRS link is the most recent data released by the IRS, if it is not up to date enough for you whine to them, not to me.

that excuse does not make your data any more valid.

 

[edthecynic]

yes, cause we all know that no major economic things have happened in the past 5 years where that report is worth anything more then a piece of a paper to wipe your ass with

Again, the source is the IRS itself and it is the most current data they have published. In those 5 years the economy was up 3 years and down 2 so it's highly likely that the value of those capital holdings is at least equal to or slightly higher than the 10 trillion.

 

[edthecynic]

2004????

And what is that 10 trillion worth now?

Jesus Christ a 5 year old table. Yeah pat yourself on the back for that one.

That IRS link is the most recent data released by the IRS, if it is not up to date enough for you whine to them, not to me.

that excuse does not make your data any more valid.

And your excuse doesn't make it any less valid either.

 

[Skull Pilot]

That IRS link is the most recent data released by the IRS, if it is not up to date enough for you whine to them, not to me.

that excuse does not make your data any more valid.

And your excuse doesn't make it any less valid either.

my excuse for what? You are the one who made the excuse about the data you provided in support of your higher taxes argument. I just pointed out that 5 year old data that does not reflect the trillions lost due to the mortgage bubble and the recent stock market crash is completely irrelevant

 

[editec]

When we have parity in incomes, then come back and talk to me about parity in taxation.

Until that time, your complaints on behalf of the stupendously wealthy about how much they pay in taxes makes you look like idiots.

 

[Skull Pilot]

When we have parity in incomes, then come back and talk to me about parity in taxation.

Until that time, your complaints on behalf of the stupendously wealthy about how much they pay in taxes makes you look like idiots.

parity: the quality or state of being equal or equivalent

so do you really believe that all incomes should be equivalent?

The burger flipper and Bill Gates should have equivalent salaries?

 

[edthecynic]

When we have parity in incomes, then come back and talk to me about parity in taxation.

Until that time, your complaints on behalf of the stupendously wealthy about how much they pay in taxes makes you look like idiots.

parity: the quality or state of being equal or equivalent

so do you really believe that all incomes should be equivalent?

The burger flipper and Bill Gates should have equivalent salaries?

The CON$ervative dumb act again.
The poster is not advocating equivalent incomes, but is OBVIOUSLY pointing out that as long as incomes are not equivalent then taxes won't be equivalent. So when the people who have the most money complain about paying the most taxes they make fools of themselves. Get it???

 

[edthecynic]

that excuse does not make your data any more valid.

And your excuse doesn't make it any less valid either.

my excuse for what? You are the one who made the excuse about the data you provided in support of your higher taxes argument. I just pointed out that 5 year old data that does not reflect the trillions lost due to the mortgage bubble and the recent stock market crash is completely irrelevant

Again, during that 5 years trillions were gained in the run up of the housing bubble and the stock market record peak before the trillions were lost in the crash, so it is probable that the 2.7 million still have at least the same 10 trillion or even a little more.

 

[editec]

When we have parity in incomes, then come back and talk to me about parity in taxation.

Until that time, your complaints on behalf of the stupendously wealthy about how much they pay in taxes makes you look like idiots.

parity: the quality or state of being equal or equivalent

so do you really believe that all incomes should be equivalent?

The burger flipper and Bill Gates should have equivalent salaries?

Do you really believe that Bill Gates contributes more to us than 100,000,000 Americans?

The market does.

 

[Skull Pilot]

And your excuse doesn't make it any less valid either.

my excuse for what? You are the one who made the excuse about the data you provided in support of your higher taxes argument. I just pointed out that 5 year old data that does not reflect the trillions lost due to the mortgage bubble and the recent stock market crash is completely irrelevant

Again, during that 5 years trillions were gained in the run up of the housing bubble and the stock market record peak before the trillions were lost in the crash, so it is probable that the 2.7 million still have at least the same 10 trillion or even a little more.

and if you bend over monkeys will probably fly out of your ass

that is as valid an assumption as yours

 

[Skull Pilot]

When we have parity in incomes, then come back and talk to me about parity in taxation.

Until that time, your complaints on behalf of the stupendously wealthy about how much they pay in taxes makes you look like idiots.

parity: the quality or state of being equal or equivalent

so do you really believe that all incomes should be equivalent?

The burger flipper and Bill Gates should have equivalent salaries?

Do you really believe that Bill Gates contributes more to us than 100,000,000 Americans?

The market does.

since Microsoft provides hundred of thousands of jobs, more than any of those 100 million people do , yes.

 

[edthecynic]

my excuse for what? You are the one who made the excuse about the data you provided in support of your higher taxes argument. I just pointed out that 5 year old data that does not reflect the trillions lost due to the mortgage bubble and the recent stock market crash is completely irrelevant

again, during that 5 years trillions were gained in the run up of the housing bubble and the stock market record peak before the trillions were lost in the crash, so it is probable that the 2.7 million still have at least the same 10 trillion or even a little more.

and if you bend over monkeys will probably fly out of your ass

that is as valid an assumption as yours

baloney!

 

[Skull Pilot]

again, during that 5 years trillions were gained in the run up of the housing bubble and the stock market record peak before the trillions were lost in the crash, so it is probable that the 2.7 million still have at least the same 10 trillion or even a little more.

and if you bend over monkeys will probably fly out of your ass

that is as valid an assumption as yours

baloney!

Bologna.

 

[Bern80]

Is Andrew a real person? When I grew up the values we were taught were to share, if the top 1% can pay this much of the taxes is there a need to cry for them. Andrew, if you are serious create a fund for the rich, a sort of opposite Christianity. Take from the poor and give to the rich. I'm sure they'll thank you.

The rich get rich because of their merit.
The Conservative Nanny State
UBI and the Flat Tax

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." John Kenneth Galbraith

Then I'm afraid you're definition of 'share' is a bit, well, fucked up, for lack of a better term. You must confused with the word 'take'. Because that's the way it is now. When I grew up the value I was taught is that sharing is a two way street. Sharing doesn't mean I have to give my little sister something I was playing with whenever she wants it.

The rich pay for the bulk of pretty much everything tax payer money is spent on. Their wealth provides jobs. And yet they remain one of the most derided groups of people in this country. It is truly baffling they are so hated, when damn near all of us would choose to be so, if all it took was snapping our fingers. But it takes more than that of course. More effort than what most are willing to put forth and we punish people for that by telling them you have to provide more than the person who wasn't wiling to put forth the same effort. That's the reality. But the left has to make excuses such as the rich don't work for their money (which is flat out statistically not true). Or they are evil greedy people who make money on others suffering. It's pathetic really.

 

[Bern80]

How about they move their wealth out of the country and not pay any at all, which is what always happens when nations overtax?

And you don't think they do that now? And foreign nations that subsidize their industries and then sell here do the same as profit goes overseas and not back into our economy.

Also it is the entire country that supports business and not the wealthy, they only take the reward. Actually a lot of the wealthy only inherited the reward.


"... legislators cannot invent too many devices for subdividing property... Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions or property in geometrical progression as they rise. Whenever there are in any country uncultivated lands and unemployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right." Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to James Madison 1785

Why wouldn't they? I applaud them for doing so. I encourage every legal means available to keep money from the government. Why would anyoe able to continue to participate in a system that punishes the successful for actually being successful and lets everyone else, realtively speaking, off the hook?

 

[edthecynic]

and if you bend over monkeys will probably fly out of your ass

that is as valid an assumption as yours

baloney!

Bologna.

ba⋅lo⋅ney

noun - foolishness; nonsense.

 

[Skull Pilot]

baloney!

Bologna.

ba⋅lo⋅ney

noun - foolishness; nonsense.

Bologna: a large seasoned sausage made of finely ground meat, usually beef and pork, that has been cooked and smoked.