Fixing Tax Loopholes, 51% of Americans Pay NO Incomes Taxes

[Too Tall]

Who here wants to give up your child tax credit?

Who here wants to give up your earned income tax credit?

Who here wants to have their bottom marginal rate raised?

That's how you'd fix this 'problem'.

In fact, letting the Bush tax cuts expire would have put tens of thousands back to paying taxes.

Obama explained that the only parts of the Bush tax cuts that he wanted to expire was on those singles making $200,000 and couples making $250,000 and up. The tens of thousands not paying taxes would be unchanged. If you are interested, I have a problem with raising taxes on anyone.

 

[Big Fitz]

I also find the liberal mind amusing when they claim the rich are not paying their taxes. This becomes a justification for taxing them more. Of course, the increase will somehow magically make them want to pay...more. Fact is they do pay and pay far more than the rest of us.

Rationalization... the tool used to justify evil.

 

[turtledude]

We should have a pure flat rate tax on all personal income with no deductions.

that certainly would put an end to the pandering politicians engage in by buying the votes of the many by promising them to jack up taxes on other people.

I prefer a consumption tax. an income tax still penalizes those who work hard and want to save. I totally reject "From each according to their ability" that the progressive tax fans spew. in reality taxes should be based on value received not on ability to pay (just like most every other financial transaction is based on--bill gates doesn't pay more for a cheeseburger than a panhandler because both get the same value)

 

[Big Fitz]

We should have a pure flat rate tax on all personal income with no deductions.

that certainly would put an end to the pandering politicians engage in by buying the votes of the many by promising them to jack up taxes on other people.

I prefer a consumption tax. an income tax still penalizes those who work hard and want to save. I totally reject "From each according to their ability" that the progressive tax fans spew. in reality taxes should be based on value received not on ability to pay (just like most every other financial transaction is based on--bill gates doesn't pay more for a cheeseburger than a panhandler because both get the same value)

hence why they won't do it without a gun to their head and a raging mob with pitchforks, torches and a portable gallows outside knocking rudely.

 

[Polk]

Easy....The tax cut enacted during the Kennedy Administration.
Look, it's very simple. Taxation in moderation is good. A balance between the needs of government and the requirements of the private sector to have capital for investment and expansion.
You people have had your heads filled with all this rhetoric from the political Left and their useful partners in the main stream media who've managed to get the middle class left all lathered up with the class envy card.

I'll ask you....What is it that attracts you to high tax rates?
What is it that makes you think that with government's poor track record on spending lack of efficiency, it would perform better THIS TIME with more of our money?
Why is it your side avoids the issue of fiscal responsibility?

Except the tax cuts enacted by the Kennedy administration didn't increase revenues. Revenues fell by 9%.

I don't find high tax rates attractive. I find Social Security attractive. I find Medicare attractive. I find education attractive. I find national defense attractive. None of those things are free.

Oh, now your side has been shown to be incorrect so your response it "except for".
Oh sure.
The federal government has no business involving itself in public education. That is a matter for the States.
Social Security is what to you? Old age pension. Not so. SS is a TAX. It became a tax when the federal government buried SS by stealing from it. The SS system is broken.
Same with Medicare. These programs cannot continue to exist in their current form.

That's not accurate. Social Security is basically fine in present form (will need a few tweaks around the edges, but they're pretty simple). Medicare is not sustainable in current form, but then again, neither is the rest of our health care system. The key to bringing down Medicare cost is to bring out health care cost inflation across the board.

 

[Google]

Easy....The tax cut enacted during the Kennedy Administration.
Look, it's very simple. Taxation in moderation is good. A balance between the needs of government and the requirements of the private sector to have capital for investment and expansion.
You people have had your heads filled with all this rhetoric from the political Left and their useful partners in the main stream media who've managed to get the middle class left all lathered up with the class envy card.

I'll ask you....What is it that attracts you to high tax rates?
What is it that makes you think that with government's poor track record on spending lack of efficiency, it would perform better THIS TIME with more of our money?
Why is it your side avoids the issue of fiscal responsibility?

Except the tax cuts enacted by the Kennedy administration didn't increase revenues. Revenues fell by 9%.

I don't find high tax rates attractive. I find Social Security attractive. I find Medicare attractive. I find education attractive. I find national defense attractive. None of those things are free.

Cutting taxes from the Kennedy era levels cannot be compared to cutting taxes in the Bush era, or cutting taxes now.

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better." - Senator Obama 2006

Not even Obama agrees with Obama Tell the truth you probably were against raising the debt ceiling in 2006 and was parroting Democrat talking points then too

 

[NYcarbineer]

Except the tax cuts enacted by the Kennedy administration didn't increase revenues. Revenues fell by 9%.

I don't find high tax rates attractive. I find Social Security attractive. I find Medicare attractive. I find education attractive. I find national defense attractive. None of those things are free.

Cutting taxes from the Kennedy era levels cannot be compared to cutting taxes in the Bush era, or cutting taxes now.

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better." - Senator Obama 2006

Not even Obama agrees with Obama Tell the truth you probably were against raising the debt ceiling in 2006 and was parroting Democrat talking points then too

My position has always been to make people pay for the government they get.

 

[Big Fitz]

Except the tax cuts enacted by the Kennedy administration didn't increase revenues. Revenues fell by 9%.

I don't find high tax rates attractive. I find Social Security attractive. I find Medicare attractive. I find education attractive. I find national defense attractive. None of those things are free.

Oh, now your side has been shown to be incorrect so your response it "except for".
Oh sure.
The federal government has no business involving itself in public education. That is a matter for the States.
Social Security is what to you? Old age pension. Not so. SS is a TAX. It became a tax when the federal government buried SS by stealing from it. The SS system is broken.
Same with Medicare. These programs cannot continue to exist in their current form.

That's not accurate. Social Security is basically fine in present form (will need a few tweaks around the edges, but they're pretty simple). Medicare is not sustainable in current form, but then again, neither is the rest of our health care system. The key to bringing down Medicare cost is to bring out health care cost inflation across the board.

Yes, and Bernie Maddof needed only a few tweeks on his ponzi scheme to make it work.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Targeting a group on a certain rung of the economic ladder for higher taxes,

doesn't that perfectly fit the definition of what conservatives call 'class warfare'?

 

[Google]

Cutting taxes from the Kennedy era levels cannot be compared to cutting taxes in the Bush era, or cutting taxes now.

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better." - Senator Obama 2006

Not even Obama agrees with Obama Tell the truth you probably were against raising the debt ceiling in 2006 and was parroting Democrat talking points then too

My position has always been to make people pay for the government they get.

Your position is in favor of raising the debt limit by $2 trillion dollars. You are being disingenuous saying your position is that people pay for the government they get.

 

[Big Fitz]

Targeting a group on a certain rung of the economic ladder for higher taxes,

doesn't that perfectly fit the definition of what conservatives call 'class warfare'?

So when we say EVERYONE should pay their 'fair share' and the same percentage regardless of how much that percentage is, it's class warfare?

Did you self lobotomize or something?

 

[Google]

Targeting a group on a certain rung of the economic ladder for higher taxes,

doesn't that perfectly fit the definition of what conservatives call 'class warfare'?

Yes it is. In what situation are conservatives in favor of targeting a group on a certain rung? Are you talking about the majority of Americans that pay zero income taxes, or have a negative return? Really, that is your example of hypocrisy?

 

[saveliberty]

Cutting taxes from the Kennedy era levels cannot be compared to cutting taxes in the Bush era, or cutting taxes now.

"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better." - Senator Obama 2006

Not even Obama agrees with Obama Tell the truth you probably were against raising the debt ceiling in 2006 and was parroting Democrat talking points then too

My position has always been to make people pay for the government they get.

Your talking user fees. Your realize the poor "use" government services the most.

 

[Claudette]

Of course they do and the will continue to do so as long as the free ride lasts.

Eventually they will run out of other peoples money. My oh my. I wonder what they will do then???

Mayby take care of themselves for a change??

 

[Polk]

Oh, now your side has been shown to be incorrect so your response it "except for".
Oh sure.
The federal government has no business involving itself in public education. That is a matter for the States.
Social Security is what to you? Old age pension. Not so. SS is a TAX. It became a tax when the federal government buried SS by stealing from it. The SS system is broken.
Same with Medicare. These programs cannot continue to exist in their current form.

That's not accurate. Social Security is basically fine in present form (will need a few tweaks around the edges, but they're pretty simple). Medicare is not sustainable in current form, but then again, neither is the rest of our health care system. The key to bringing down Medicare cost is to bring out health care cost inflation across the board.

Yes, and Bernie Maddof needed only a few tweeks on his ponzi scheme to make it work.

You know, these discussions could be a lot more productive if you knew what Social Security actually is.

 

[Polk]

Targeting a group on a certain rung of the economic ladder for higher taxes,

doesn't that perfectly fit the definition of what conservatives call 'class warfare'?

So when we say EVERYONE should pay their 'fair share' and the same percentage regardless of how much that percentage is, it's class warfare?

Did you self lobotomize or something?

"Same percentage". Unless the income comes from capital gains. Then it should be tax-free.

 

[hellofromwarsaw]

This is lowest tax rate for the rich in 80 years- that and Pub dereg and BS enforcement is a GREAT way to have a depression, again. The greatest generation rich were always paying back for their good fortune for living in such a great country (and CEOs didn't make 300X the average worker-20x). Voodoo sucks- enjoy hell, greedy bastids and silly dupes....

 

[Big Fitz]

Targeting a group on a certain rung of the economic ladder for higher taxes,

doesn't that perfectly fit the definition of what conservatives call 'class warfare'?

So when we say EVERYONE should pay their 'fair share' and the same percentage regardless of how much that percentage is, it's class warfare?

Did you self lobotomize or something?

"Same percentage". Unless the income comes from capital gains. Then it should be tax-free.

So much for the wealthy paying their 'fair share' I guess.

 

[Trajan]

I read about 8-9 pages of the vitriol on this thread before I decided to post. These willfully ignorant have the bollocks to accuse liberals of class warfare when the posts here were just dripping with venom against the poor.

Yes, there are people who are too poor to pay income taxes, most of SS if my friends are taken into consideration. LOL But the right seems to feel the poor folks want to be poor and are doing it willfully.

But this is a RW myth and I've made it my goal to strike it down every time I see it. It's bullshit and should be treated that way.

Yes yes yes. Look this thread has nothing to do with your desire to weep for the poor.
Quite frankly, the poor have nothing to do with this.
It is a FACT that nearly half of all Americans pay no federal income tax. That is a fact and it not in dispute. You Lefties dig up all the nonsense such as that dopey pie chart. A chart that tells only one part of the story.
You libs are hell bent on one tax increase after another.
You libs do not dare discuss fiscal responsibility because you do not believe in it.

No, it is not true that "nearly half" of all Americans pay no federal income tax. If it is such a fact where is your proof? It is just part of your magical thinking when you keep repeating this with nothing to back you up. If there is another part of the story, please be my guest and fill us in. At least we have a chart, you have nothing.

And your wild imaginings about how "libs" are is just another example of magical thinking. You don't deal in facts. Just magic thinking and bullshit.

so, lets see;


The Earned Income Tax Credit or the EITC is a refundable federal income tax credit for low to moderate income working individuals and families. Congress originally approved the tax credit legislation in 1975 in part to offset the burden of social security taxes and to provide an incentive to work. When EITC exceeds the amount of taxes owed, it results in a tax refund to those who claim and qualify for the credit.

http://www.irs.gov/individuals/article/0,,id=96406,00.html


so, in effect it appears that one of the roles of the EITC is to basically provide relief from SSI and if the income is low enough certainly some of the medicare fica withholding as well.

what do you think of that?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Targeting a group on a certain rung of the economic ladder for higher taxes,

doesn't that perfectly fit the definition of what conservatives call 'class warfare'?

No. But it should fit well with the "shared sacrifice" crowd. No?