Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Again more bullshit. You pay the same rate up to the threshold, so those who earn more than the threshold pay a lower rate. and cap gains pay no FICA tax, so not only do they pay a lower tax rate on their income they pay nothing at all in FICA taxes.The taxes for Medicare and FICA go into the same general fund budget as standard income taxes. They are a tax on one set of individuals and a transfer payment to another - just like most government spending.Your article Rails about Ignoring FICA and MC, which the 47% does pay. Why would you count Fica and MC? They are to fund specific Programs. It is Federal Income Tax withholding that funds the US budget, and it is Federal Income tax that the right is talking about when they say 47% pay 0 and the top 2 % pay 50%.
Why wouldn't you count it?
Because we all pay FICA and MC at the same rate, Rich or Poor. The only place you end up with 47% not paying anything at all, is with the Progressive Federal Income Tax. It's not a matter of Counting FICA and MC or not, because everyone pays those taxes. Fact's are Fact's 47% of Tax Payers paid no Federal Income Tax last year.
Besides FICA and MC are not SUPPOSE to be used to fund the General Budget.
This thread is about the 47% that get bashed for supposedly paying no taxes.
The wealthiest people in America pay a lot more taxes than the middle class or the poor, according to private and government data. They pay at a higher rate, and as a group, they contribute a much larger share of the overall taxes collected by the federal government.
The 10% of households with the highest incomes pay more than half of all federal taxes. They pay more than 70% of federal income taxes, according to the CBO. I am personally sick of the constant parsing of fact from fiction!
CHART OF THE DAY: These Are The 47 Percent
By Brian Beutler | October 14, 2011
What's really going on here is that about 47 percent of households paid no federal income tax in 2009. Either they owed nothing, or they got as much back from the federal government as they paid -- or more.
This ignores payroll taxes, state and local taxes, gas taxes, excise taxes and much more. But to hear conservatives talk about it, you'd think these people's entire tax burden was $0.00. In April, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), citing similar data, claimed "According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, 49 percent of households are paying 100 percent of taxes coming in to the federal government." Notice the absence of the key qualifier, "income." And Grassley's far from alone.
Right now about one-third of the 47 percent are people who are too old to work, full time students, disability beneficiaries, long-term unemployed and other such despicable freeloaders. Because the 47 percent figure comes from using "households that file" as the denominator it includes people who have part time jobs and low paying jobs, Social Security and unemployment beneficiaries. The rest were people whose jobs paid little enough that, on net, they owed no income taxes. These people may have benefited from the stimulus' Making-Work-Pay tax credit, or saw their incomes drop enough during the recession to qualify for the Earned Income Tax Credit, and so on.
More: CHART OF THE DAY: These Are The 47 Percent | TPMDC
The wealthiest people in America pay a lot more taxes than the middle class or the poor, according to private and government data. They pay at a higher rate, and as a group, they contribute a much larger share of the overall taxes collected by the federal government.
The 10% of households with the highest incomes pay more than half of all federal taxes. They pay more than 70% of federal income taxes, according to the CBO. I am personally sick of the constant parsing of fact from fiction!
That's bullshit. Figures I saw today claim that the wealthy pay about 17%. I am upward of 40%.
I am just poor enough to not be able to afford such lawyers nor do I have a desire to employ them.
Again more bullshit. You pay the same rate up to the threshold, so those who earn more than the threshold pay a lower rate. and cap gains pay no FICA tax, so not only do they pay a lower tax rate on their income they pay nothing at all in FICA taxes.The taxes for Medicare and FICA go into the same general fund budget as standard income taxes. They are a tax on one set of individuals and a transfer payment to another - just like most government spending.
Why wouldn't you count it?
Because we all pay FICA and MC at the same rate, Rich or Poor. The only place you end up with 47% not paying anything at all, is with the Progressive Federal Income Tax. It's not a matter of Counting FICA and MC or not, because everyone pays those taxes. Fact's are Fact's 47% of Tax Payers paid no Federal Income Tax last year.
Besides FICA and MC are not SUPPOSE to be used to fund the General Budget.
Again more bullshit. You pay the same rate up to the threshold, so those who earn more than the threshold pay a lower rate. and cap gains pay no FICA tax, so not only do they pay a lower tax rate on their income they pay nothing at all in FICA taxes.Because we all pay FICA and MC at the same rate, Rich or Poor. The only place you end up with 47% not paying anything at all, is with the Progressive Federal Income Tax. It's not a matter of Counting FICA and MC or not, because everyone pays those taxes. Fact's are Fact's 47% of Tax Payers paid no Federal Income Tax last year.
Besides FICA and MC are not SUPPOSE to be used to fund the General Budget.
Are you trying to redefine Social Security and Medicare in your own image Editec?? FDR would NOT approve of your analysis. THese insurance programs were conceived as UNIVERSAL programs for ALL workers. Premiums into an insurance program where closely EQUAL BENEFITS came from closely EQUAL CONTRIBUTIONS. NOTHING in the formulation of these plans said that SOME workers needed to pay 4 or 5 times what somebody was paying to get essentially the same benefits.
Your unique interpretation of what's FAIR for the FICA programs was NOWHERE to be found in the original concepts. And if that's what UNIVERSAL means, that it becomes just another redistribution of benefits --- you're never gonna fool the American people with UNIVERSAL healthcare or UNIVERSAL higher education. FICA taxes are NOT regressive. They are supposed to reflect actual costs of service. And the "service" is not OPTIONAL or debateable. If you want to redefine what FDR set out as Soc Sec -- I'd rather end it. I'm may be the ONLY person on this thread that gives a shit what the original intent was..
No, that's not right. They weren't conceived as universal programs for all workers (in fact, the original program left out many) and contributions were never "closely equal". Someone making 25% of the cap was always going to pay 1/4 of the person making the cap or someone making 20x the cap.Again more bullshit. You pay the same rate up to the threshold, so those who earn more than the threshold pay a lower rate. and cap gains pay no FICA tax, so not only do they pay a lower tax rate on their income they pay nothing at all in FICA taxes.Because we all pay FICA and MC at the same rate, Rich or Poor. The only place you end up with 47% not paying anything at all, is with the Progressive Federal Income Tax. It's not a matter of Counting FICA and MC or not, because everyone pays those taxes. Fact's are Fact's 47% of Tax Payers paid no Federal Income Tax last year.
Besides FICA and MC are not SUPPOSE to be used to fund the General Budget.
Are you trying to redefine Social Security and Medicare in your own image Editec?? FDR would NOT approve of your analysis. THese insurance programs were conceived as UNIVERSAL programs for ALL workers. Premiums into an insurance program where closely EQUAL BENEFITS came from closely EQUAL CONTRIBUTIONS. NOTHING in the formulation of these plans said that SOME workers needed to pay 4 or 5 times what somebody was paying to get essentially the same benefits.
Your unique interpretation of what's FAIR for the FICA programs was NOWHERE to be found in the original concepts. And if that's what UNIVERSAL means, that it becomes just another redistribution of benefits --- you're never gonna fool the American people with UNIVERSAL healthcare or UNIVERSAL higher education. FICA taxes are NOT regressive.
And 8537 --- THese FICA FUNDS do NOT go into the General Fund. Soc Sec and Medicare premiums go DIRECTLY to those Agencies.
It's only separate as an accounting identity.THe accounting is SEPARATE and MOST of us want to keep it that way because the Clown College can't keep their paws off of Trust Funds and dedicated funding streams..
Again more bullshit. You pay the same rate up to the threshold, so those who earn more than the threshold pay a lower rate. and cap gains pay no FICA tax, so not only do they pay a lower tax rate on their income they pay nothing at all in FICA taxes.Because we all pay FICA and MC at the same rate, Rich or Poor. The only place you end up with 47% not paying anything at all, is with the Progressive Federal Income Tax. It's not a matter of Counting FICA and MC or not, because everyone pays those taxes. Fact's are Fact's 47% of Tax Payers paid no Federal Income Tax last year.
Besides FICA and MC are not SUPPOSE to be used to fund the General Budget.
Are you trying to redefine Social Security and Medicare in your own image Editec?? FDR would NOT approve of your analysis. THese insurance programs were conceived as UNIVERSAL programs for ALL workers. Premiums into an insurance program where closely EQUAL BENEFITS came from closely EQUAL CONTRIBUTIONS. NOTHING in the formulation of these plans said that SOME workers needed to pay 4 or 5 times what somebody was paying to get essentially the same benefits.
Your unique interpretation of what's FAIR for the FICA programs was NOWHERE to be found in the original concepts. And if that's what UNIVERSAL means, that it becomes just another redistribution of benefits --- you're never gonna fool the American people with UNIVERSAL healthcare or UNIVERSAL higher education. FICA taxes are NOT regressive. They are supposed to reflect actual costs of service. And the "service" is not OPTIONAL or debateable. If you want to redefine what FDR set out as Soc Sec -- I'd rather end it. I'm may be the ONLY person on this thread that gives a shit what the original intent was..
And 8537 --- THese FICA FUNDS do NOT go into the General Fund. Soc Sec and Medicare premiums go DIRECTLY to those Agencies. THe accounting is SEPARATE and MOST of us want to keep it that way because the Clown College can't keep their paws off of Trust Funds and dedicated funding streams..
No, that's not right. They weren't conceived as universal programs for all workers (in fact, the original program left out many) and contributions were never "closely equal". Someone making 25% of the cap was always going to pay 1/4 of the person making the cap or someone making 20x the cap.Again more bullshit. You pay the same rate up to the threshold, so those who earn more than the threshold pay a lower rate. and cap gains pay no FICA tax, so not only do they pay a lower tax rate on their income they pay nothing at all in FICA taxes.
Are you trying to redefine Social Security and Medicare in your own image Editec?? FDR would NOT approve of your analysis. THese insurance programs were conceived as UNIVERSAL programs for ALL workers. Premiums into an insurance program where closely EQUAL BENEFITS came from closely EQUAL CONTRIBUTIONS. NOTHING in the formulation of these plans said that SOME workers needed to pay 4 or 5 times what somebody was paying to get essentially the same benefits.
See the FDR statement below. Initially SS was phased in by industry. NOT by class. So as each new industry was included, ALL workers were included. WOMEN for instance were largely excluded at first. By mid 50s 80% of all workers included. The cap remained nearly level til the 70s. A LOT of bad SS decisions were made in the 70s. Especially the plan to STEAL excess FICA contributions. (see MartyBegan's post below)
Huh? Of COURSE they're regressive. In fact, they are the definition of regressive: As you earn more, your contribution rate goes down. Someone making a million pays a rate 1/10th of someone making 100K.
Can't be regressive if the purpose of the FICA contribution is only to fund the program. Someone making a million doesn't NEED to contribute at the same rate for ALL of his salary to get essentially the same measly benefit as someone making 40K.. FICA programs ARE NOT supposed to be revenue generators for the general fund.
And 8537 --- THese FICA FUNDS do NOT go into the General Fund. Soc Sec and Medicare premiums go DIRECTLY to those Agencies.
No, they don't. They go directly into a trust fund, and are immediately used to pay current benefit OR exchanged for special issue treasuries to fund...The general fund. Payments to SS recipients actually come out of that same general fund.
I said the same thing. Except for the THEFT of EXCESS SS. NOTHING should ever go into the General Fund that isn't exchanged for one of those phoney "notes" in the Trust Fund. But NO -- payments come directly out of SSA accounting -- NOT the General Fund -- Unless SS is running in deficit.
It's only separate as an accounting identity.THe accounting is SEPARATE and MOST of us want to keep it that way because the Clown College can't keep their paws off of Trust Funds and dedicated funding streams..
FOLLOWING his approval of the Social Security Act Amendments of 1939, President Roosevelt on August 11 made a public statement in which he declared the amendments to be "another tremendous step forward in providing greater security for the people of this country." The President commented specifically on the changes in the old-age insurance system, expressing his gratification that in liberalizing the provisions a reasonable relationship had been retained between wage loss sustained and benefits received. "This," he declared, "is a most important distinguishing characteristic of social insurance as contrasted with any system of flat pensions."
With regard to changes in coverage of the system, the President remarked: "I am glad that the insurance benefits have been extended to cover workers in some occupations that have previously not been covered. However, workers in other occupations have been excluded. In my opinion, it is imperative that these insurance benefits be extended to workers in all occupations."
I am the 47% that pay no income tax!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am the 47% that pay no income tax!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am the 47% that pay no income tax!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am the 47% that pay no income tax!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BTW, Uncle Tom Cain's 9-9-9 Pizza Party Plan will change your "no income tax" status in the future.
I am the 47% that pay no income tax!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BTW, Uncle Tom Cain's 9-9-9 Pizza Party Plan will change your "no income tax" status in the future.
Yeah, fork them tips over baby. Don't ya know all have to pay their "Fair" share.
BTW, Uncle Tom Cain's 9-9-9 Pizza Party Plan will change your "no income tax" status in the future.
Yeah, fork them tips over baby. Don't ya know all have to pay their "Fair" share.
Yeah, and forget about Social Security, Medicare, and... Medicaid in your golden years.
