AP: Half of U.S. pays no federal income tax

[NYcarbineer]

The eye-opener in this thread is how strong the consensus is among conservatives

to RAISE TAXES on middle and lower income Americans.

Why not? Who the **** are you...someone special? Some people are getting a free ride....time for everyone to start pulling their own weight in the U.S.A. instead of being parasites. It's a FACT that 73% of income taxes are paid by those making more than $300k a year.

I pay about 4 times what a person with a couple kids pays. Same wage level.

So shut up, genius.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The eye-opener in this thread is how strong the consensus is among conservatives

to RAISE TAXES on middle and lower income Americans.

Why not? Who the **** are you...someone special? Some people are getting a free ride....time for everyone to start pulling their own weight in the U.S.A. instead of being parasites. It's a FACT that 73% of income taxes are paid by those making more than $300k a year.

So all this time conservatives have been trashing Obama claiming he WILL raise taxes on people making less than 250,000,

the TRUTH is,

conservatives WANT him to raise taxes on those people.

A-*******-MAZING!!!

 

[FA_Q2]

The eye-opener in this thread is how strong the consensus is among conservatives

to RAISE TAXES on middle and lower income Americans.

Why not? Who the **** are you...someone special? Some people are getting a free ride....time for everyone to start pulling their own weight in the U.S.A. instead of being parasites. It's a FACT that 73% of income taxes are paid by those making more than $300k a year.

So all this time conservatives have been trashing Obama claiming he WILL raise taxes on people making less than 250,000,

the TRUTH is,

conservatives WANT him to raise taxes on those people.

A-*******-MAZING!!!

once again, this is not entirely true. This is more of a debate on the systemic problems associated with the terrible tax code we currently employ. I, for one, don't mind that much that the Bush tax cuts are going to expire but for entirely different reasons than stated. It really is idiotic to lower taxes and then go to war. As we are still at war, I can see the need for the cuts to be repealed. What I believe the crux of the problem here is that there are 50% of the population voting (and thereby affecting tax code) when they do not even take part in the payment of those taxes. It is problematic when you have such a large portion of the casting a vote to increase taxes when those people are not only unaffected but also benefit from said increase. There does need to be a tiered tax system and that would include a small portion of people that should not have to pay taxes. The McDonalds worker still needs to be able to earn a living and taxing those that earn at that rate is counterproductive. However, a flat tiered tax system that would tax a significant portion of the populous, say 80%, with 2 or three tiers would make everyone aware of the impact of those taxes and allow responsible choices to be made. On that same track, there should be NO earnings through taxes (aka EIC). That creates entitlement and rewards you for making little money. This would raise taxes on the vast majority of people but it would make a better system with a more tax educated voting population. I also believe that such a system would see vastly reduces tax % because of the lack of loopholes would ensure you paid what you should be paying and not how good your accountant was.


I would also like to address this stupid concept of 'fair.' There is no fair and there never will be. This is not the school yard. We have grown past first grade. Life is not, nor will be or even should be fair. If we are looking at taxing people in a fair manner then such a system is doomed to failure from the get go. What can be done is taxing in an advantageous way. Taxes should be collected in a manner that is best for the system and the people taxed overall and that means NOT overtaxing the rich as well as not under taxing the majority.

 

[The T]

The eye-opener in this thread is how strong the consensus is among conservatives

to RAISE TAXES on middle and lower income Americans.

Why not? Who the **** are you...someone special? Some people are getting a free ride....time for everyone to start pulling their own weight in the U.S.A. instead of being parasites. It's a FACT that 73% of income taxes are paid by those making more than $300k a year.

So all this time conservatives have been trashing Obama claiming he WILL raise taxes on people making less than 250,000,

the TRUTH is,

conservatives WANT him to raise taxes on those people.

A-*******-MAZING!!!

PROVE this assertion.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why not? Who the **** are you...someone special? Some people are getting a free ride....time for everyone to start pulling their own weight in the U.S.A. instead of being parasites. It's a FACT that 73% of income taxes are paid by those making more than $300k a year.

So all this time conservatives have been trashing Obama claiming he WILL raise taxes on people making less than 250,000,

the TRUTH is,

conservatives WANT him to raise taxes on those people.

A-*******-MAZING!!!

PROVE this assertion.

Read this thread. I may have missed it, but I don't think I saw any conservatives in this thread who were happy with this situation. So what would make y'all happy?

And if your response is that you want more tax cuts, then you're just going to increase the percent of Americans who pay NO federal income tax, and the portion of the population that does pay the taxes will get even smaller.

So which is it?

 

[DiamondDave]

Read the title of this thread!

The topic is CON$ whining and bitching about the number of people who pay no income taxes after the Bush tax cuts that CON$ want to make permanent.

Now CON$ want to blame Obama for the non-payers calling them his voters, but he wants to let the Bush tax cuts expire which would significantly cut the number paying no income tax.

Now if you want to change the topic to the flat tax, I'm for a flat tax only as long as there are no deductions of any kind, but I would like to know where you stand on the topic of this thread as it relates to the Bush tax cuts.
Do you want to make them permanent as the CON$ and the GOP do or do you want them to expire?

Bush's tax cuts didn't have a goddam thing to do with poor people paying no taxes. Besides now, you're off your talking points that the Bush tax cuts were for the rich only!!!! I wish you fucktard hacks would get your stories straight before vomiting all over yourselves.

The only difference between the 20% not paying income taxes in 2001 and the 47% now is the Bush tax cuts.
And sorry, I didn't know only CON$ervaTards were allowed to be on both sides of an argument.

Already debunked by a simple search to a non-winger site.. you ******* winger idiot... the % of people not paying income taxes before Bush was not 20%... that is a complete FABRICATION by you and some supporting winger site

 

[DiamondDave]

The eye-opener in this thread is how strong the consensus is among conservatives

to RAISE TAXES on middle and lower income Americans.

yes indeed... see.. when you pay ZERO, and you have income, that is WRONG.. .especially when someone is paying a high percentage and is funding the entitlements you are voting people in for to ensure you get

So yes... I want to see those ~50% that pay no income tax have their taxes RAISED to ensure they start paying taxes

So you don't want the Bush tax cuts made permanent!
Thanks.

Nice try you winger asshole

Try sticking to what I said... not to try and stick your hand up my ass like a ventriloquist dummy and spout words YOU want said....

I don't want certain people to pay a higher rate than anyone else.... I would be all for eliminating the 'Bush Tax cuts' if everyone was put into that very same tax rate at the top.... and see how fast you little bong smoking libbies would be calling for controlled spending and calling for 'tax cuts'

As it is.. you continually show your warped motherfucking support for selective equality.. equality in government when it benefits you.. unequal treatment of others outside of your group when it benefits you

 

[Foxfyre]

I am adopting a new policy.

I'm not going to respond to posts that are full of false choices and splattered with CON$.

Damn, I have to spread some rep around before I can rep you again, but Hallelujah Sister! You have been redeemed!

 

[FireFly]

Its a sad reflection on how little money 50% of Americans make.

Thanks to Obama 50% don't make enough to pay taxes.

 

[Care4all]

Why not? Who the **** are you...someone special? Some people are getting a free ride....time for everyone to start pulling their own weight in the U.S.A. instead of being parasites. It's a FACT that 73% of income taxes are paid by those making more than $300k a year.

So all this time conservatives have been trashing Obama claiming he WILL raise taxes on people making less than 250,000,

the TRUTH is,

conservatives WANT him to raise taxes on those people.

A-*******-MAZING!!!

once again, this is not entirely true. This is more of a debate on the systemic problems associated with the terrible tax code we currently employ. I, for one, don't mind that much that the Bush tax cuts are going to expire but for entirely different reasons than stated. It really is idiotic to lower taxes and then go to war. As we are still at war, I can see the need for the cuts to be repealed. What I believe the crux of the problem here is that there are 50% of the population voting (and thereby affecting tax code) when they do not even take part in the payment of those taxes. It is problematic when you have such a large portion of the casting a vote to increase taxes when those people are not only unaffected but also benefit from said increase. There does need to be a tiered tax system and that would include a small portion of people that should not have to pay taxes. The McDonalds worker still needs to be able to earn a living and taxing those that earn at that rate is counterproductive. However, a flat tiered tax system that would tax a significant portion of the populous, say 80%, with 2 or three tiers would make everyone aware of the impact of those taxes and allow responsible choices to be made. On that same track, there should be NO earnings through taxes (aka EIC). That creates entitlement and rewards you for making little money. This would raise taxes on the vast majority of people but it would make a better system with a more tax educated voting population. I also believe that such a system would see vastly reduces tax % because of the lack of loopholes would ensure you paid what you should be paying and not how good your accountant was.


I would also like to address this stupid concept of 'fair.' There is no fair and there never will be. This is not the school yard. We have grown past first grade. Life is not, nor will be or even should be fair. If we are looking at taxing people in a fair manner then such a system is doomed to failure from the get go. What can be done is taxing in an advantageous way. Taxes should be collected in a manner that is best for the system and the people taxed overall and that means NOT overtaxing the rich as well as not under taxing the majority.

I thought only 50% of our population eligible to vote, votes consistantly in elections?

If this is the case, then how do you honestly know that the 50% that does vote, are not mostly people who work and do pay taxes.

the other thing that is never mentioned is that these people DO PAY TAXES that helps pay for the federal budget, which includes social security and medicare...yes, both of those ARE IN THE FEDERAL BUDGET....so when someone says we spent $3.5 trillion last year in our budget that does INCLUDE SS....WHY LEAVE IT OUT, when we are talking about taxes collected by SS to help pay for that $3.5 trillion, ya know?

And in addition to this, over $2 trillion dollars just the past 8 years of president bush's reign .... in social security SURPLUS taxes, were borrowed and used by congress to pay for things that income taxes WERE SUPPOSE TO PAY FOR.....
so to say that these people have not contributed in taxes, to the expenses of our government, our budget, when they pay SS in excess and their EXCESS IS BEING USED by congress to help claim their budget is closer to being balanced.

then on top of all of this, that 50% is a working population and they more than likely drive to work so they DO PAY gas taxes that get added to the federal treasury and used to pay for things in our budget.....so all of this claim that 50% pay no taxes is simply a bunch of BUNK.

oh, anddddddd, in addition to all of that, in every purchase they make that came from a corporation, those corporate taxes are put in to the price of the product, and believe me, 50% of the country's purchasing power is alot of business taxes and corporate taxes that these folks also helped pay, that went in to the federal treasury to help pay the bills.....

so ENOUGH ALREADY WITH THIS CRAP about people not paying or contributing to this country....

and we have not even BEGUN to talk about State taxes and Property taxes and sales taxes that these people pay that take up MUCH MORE of their income than it would for the ones that make alot of money and can save or use their money elsewhere, where taxes are not collected off of it, until a later date or not at all if sheltered properly....

sheesh....

please note, my caps are not meant as "yelling" but as emphasis!

Care

 

[edthecynic]

Bush's tax cuts didn't have a goddam thing to do with poor people paying no taxes. Besides now, you're off your talking points that the Bush tax cuts were for the rich only!!!! I wish you fucktard hacks would get your stories straight before vomiting all over yourselves.

The only difference between the 20% not paying income taxes in 2001 and the 47% now is the Bush tax cuts.
And sorry, I didn't know only CON$ervaTards were allowed to be on both sides of an argument.

Already debunked by a simple search to a non-winger site.. you ******* winger idiot... the % of people not paying income taxes before Bush was not 20%... that is a complete FABRICATION by you and some supporting winger site

You debunked diddily!!! And you know it because you posted no link.

CON$erevative boedicca posted the link that showed only the bottom quintile paid no income tax. Her link only divided groups by quintile.
And here's the radical extremist right-wing tax foundation saying essentially the same thing, only to the exact percent.

Ain't those Bush tax cuts great!
Let's make them permanent so you whining crybabies can ***** permanently!!

The Tax Foundation - Record Numbers of People Paying No Income Tax; Over 50 Million "Nonpayers" Include Families Making over $50,000

59 Percent Increase in Nonpayers Since 2000
Entering the 2000s with one in four tax filers owing nothing, the nonpayers pool was supercharged by the Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003—especially by the doubling of the child credit to $1,000. By 2004, when the credit expansion was fully phased in, the number of nonpayers increased by 10.5 million, a 32-percent jump in the space of four years.

 

[Flopper]

Tax the poor - Gives them incentive to get rich.

 

[Care4all]

Tax the poor - Gives them incentive to get rich.

can't get blood out of a turnip, no matter how hard ya try.....

 

[Foxfyre]

Tax the poor - Gives them incentive to get rich.

I don't look at it as taxing the poor. I hate deviding people into classes - black/white rich/poor - urban/rural - CEOS/janitors or whatever

I look at it as all citizens participating equitably in the system that all have opportunity to benefit from, and all having an equitable stake in the consequences of laws, regulation, and policy decided by their elected leaders.

I want to remove at least some of the power from government to bribe and coerce votes. I want to remove at least some of the incentive not to prosper as you suggest. And I want to remove class envy and separating people into groups from the total equation.

 

[Care4all]

cutting out the big buck lobbies would be a huge step in the right direction....

 

[Care4all]

why is it, that more of their OWN money, in to the working poor's own hands, not a GOOD THING, when it is ALWAYS said to be a good thing when tax breaks are given to others?

the standard deductions, that put many of these people in to the position where they do not owe any taxes, ARE NOT something that is not given to the wealthy who do end up paying taxes...they just end up paying taxes because they make more than the deductions they were given... the first 20k or so that couples make IS NOT TAXABLE for them too... the working poor get no special treatment when it comes to that....ya know?

so why are the wealthy so envious of the poor?

 

[Foxfyre]

why is it, that more of their OWN money, in to the working poor's own hands, not a GOOD THING, when it is ALWAYS said to be a good thing when tax breaks are given to others?

the standard deductions, that put many of these people in to the position where they do not owe any taxes, ARE NOT something that is not given to the wealthy who do end up paying taxes...they just end up paying taxes because they make more than the deductions they were given...so the first 20k or so that couples make IS NOT TAXABLE for them too...so the working poor get no special treatment when it comes to that....ya know?

so why are the wealthy so envious of the poor?

The wealthy don't envy the poor. The smart wealthy don't despise or resent the poor either.

Wanting everybody to share in the responsibility to support the government is not a matter of envy. It is a matter of removing some of the power from government to corrupt the system. And when we do that, we re-create an environment in which almost nobody who doesn't want to be poor needs to stay poor. And we remove all incentive for choosing not to prosper. Everybody benefits.

However one might despise the rich, we cannot hurt or punish or penalize or confiscate wealth from the rich without hurting the poor.

 

[Care4all]

why is it, that more of their OWN money, in to the working poor's own hands, not a GOOD THING, when it is ALWAYS said to be a good thing when tax breaks are given to others?

the standard deductions, that put many of these people in to the position where they do not owe any taxes, ARE NOT something that is not given to the wealthy who do end up paying taxes...they just end up paying taxes because they make more than the deductions they were given...so the first 20k or so that couples make IS NOT TAXABLE for them too...so the working poor get no special treatment when it comes to that....ya know?

so why are the wealthy so envious of the poor?

The wealthy don't envy the poor. The smart wealthy don't despise or resent the poor either.

Wanting everybody to share in the responsibility to support the government is not a matter of envy. It is a matter of removing some of the power from government to corrupt the system. And when we do that, we re-create an environment in which almost nobody who doesn't want to be poor needs to stay poor. And we remove all incentive for choosing not to prosper. Everybody benefits.

However one might despise the rich, we cannot hurt or punish or penalize or confiscate wealth from the rich without hurting the poor.

I just totally disagree.

As I explained above, these people ARE PAYING TAXES that contribute to the government.

People that do not pay taxes at all, like me, because I do not work or do not pay any taxes of my own, should not be eligible to vote and contribute to who runs my country is simply unjust....

and paying taxes as a requirement to vote is a POLL TAX and unconstitutional

and in addition to this, our congressmen SHOULD BE LISTENING TO THE CITIZENS of this country....this IS WHO they represent and we should be able to influence their vote....so, to say you don't want the congressmen to represent people just because they do not pay taxes is just too far fetched for me to get my head around...unless i am misunderstanding you on this?

Cut the corporate lobbies out of the picture, you cut out the congressman's gold lined pocket that guides him in the wrong direction imo, and away from the will of the people that he represents.

...Representatives are suppose to represent the citizens, that's why they are called representatives.....and they are the representatives of ALL in their district, whether they voted or not, whether they pay taxes or not....

 

[Foxfyre]

why is it, that more of their OWN money, in to the working poor's own hands, not a GOOD THING, when it is ALWAYS said to be a good thing when tax breaks are given to others?

the standard deductions, that put many of these people in to the position where they do not owe any taxes, ARE NOT something that is not given to the wealthy who do end up paying taxes...they just end up paying taxes because they make more than the deductions they were given...so the first 20k or so that couples make IS NOT TAXABLE for them too...so the working poor get no special treatment when it comes to that....ya know?

so why are the wealthy so envious of the poor?

The wealthy don't envy the poor. The smart wealthy don't despise or resent the poor either.

Wanting everybody to share in the responsibility to support the government is not a matter of envy. It is a matter of removing some of the power from government to corrupt the system. And when we do that, we re-create an environment in which almost nobody who doesn't want to be poor needs to stay poor. And we remove all incentive for choosing not to prosper. Everybody benefits.

However one might despise the rich, we cannot hurt or punish or penalize or confiscate wealth from the rich without hurting the poor.

I just totally disagree.

As I explained above, these people ARE PAYING TAXES that contribute to the government.

People that do not pay taxes at all, like me, because I do not work or do not pay any taxes of my own, should not be eligible to vote and contribute to who runs my country is simply unjust....

and paying taxes as a requirement to vote is a POLL TAX and unconstitutional

and in addition to this, our congressmen SHOULD BE LISTENING TO THE CITIZENS of this country....this IS WHO they represent and we should be able to influence their vote....so, to say you don't want the congressmen to represent people just because they do not pay taxes is just too far fetched for me to get my head around...unless i am misunderstanding you on this?

Cut the corporate lobbies out of the picture, you cut out the congressman's gold lined pocket that guides him in the wrong direction imo, and away from the will of the people that he represents.

...Representatives are suppose to represent the citizens, that's why they are called representatives.....and they are the representatives of ALL in their district, whether they voted or not, whether they pay taxes or not....

Come on Care. I didn't even mention who should or should not be eligible to vote.

But seriously, that 50% who are paying no income taxes are a HUGE voting block with MUCH incentive to elect people who will sustain their exemptions from the federal income tax rolls. When it doesn't affect them, they are likely not to care how much taxes are raised on everybody else and even support everybody else paying more taxes. When half the population has incentive to stick it to the other half, that cannot help but corrupt the process.

I oppose any form of VAT or the so-called Fair Tax purely because I believe these will be regressive and will hurt the poor the most. I support a flat tax that almost everybody will be subject to, however, to give everybody a reason to be interested in tax policy and directly experience the consequences of tax policy.

Those who don't earn any income at all of course will not be subject to income tax just as they aren't now.

And with that, I'm heading off to find my pillow. Good night friend.

 

[edthecynic]

But seriously, that 50% who are paying no income taxes are a HUGE voting block with MUCH incentive to elect people who will sustain their exemptions from the federal income tax rolls.

So you admit this is a Republican plot to create a permanent GOP voting bloc. After all, according to the right-wing tax foundation the number of non tax payers started their steady rise under Reagan and accelerated under Bush II.
Oh wait, even though the GOP is responsible for the freeloaders, you CON$ blame the Dems.