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

[Care4all]

the rich benefit from government works....the airports are for them, not for the poorest...we gave them 15 billion in one month after 9/11....was that for the poor? I think not....

we gave the banks a trillion and counting....was that for the poor? I think NOT.....

We bailed GM, ford, chrysler out, was that for the poor....I think NOT. We put in universities, was that for the poorest, I think NOT.
we fund medical research and development...is that really for the poor, I think NOT.
We give tax breaks to couples sending their children to college....was that for the poorest? I think not...

me thinks you have blinders on big Fitz and.....

I liked your other avatar better!

 

[DiamondDave]

As long as everyone's dollar for dollar income is taxed at the same rate there is no inequality, be it in a progressive or flat tax system.

The progressive system, by nature ensures a change to the playing field (income) and inherently creates the inequality in treatment...

Like I said.. I fully believe you see and know this... but desperately try to continue to defend someone else paying more of a % than you...

Personally, I think you are just projecting your own issue on me.

Does the person who earns 50k in taxable income pay the same rate on dollars 20k-25k earned as the persona who earns 27 million? Yes or no?

If that 50k person were to begin making 27 million would they pay at a different rate than the guy already making that much and vice versa? Yes or no?

Again.. you are acting as if dollars 1-20000 never existed... so you are changing the playing field.. I simply insist that they are earned just as all the other dollars are...

You are simply disguising your method for a subjective progressive system

 

[Big Fitz]

the rich benefit from government works....the airports are for them, not for the poorest...we gave them 15 billion in one month after 9/11....was that for the poor? I think not....

we gave the banks a trillion and counting....was that for the poor? I think NOT.....

We bailed GM, ford, chrysler out, was that for the poor....I think NOT. We put in universities, was that for the poorest, I think NOT.
we fund medical research and development...is that really for the poor, I think NOT.
We give tax breaks to couples sending their children to college....was that for the poorest? I think not...

me thinks you have blinders on big Fitz and.....

I liked your other avatar better!

And you cite multiple liberal policies that create more discrimination against one group of people over another due to their success in life. These are all policies of discrimination that could and probably should be done away with. Bailouts, absolutely. Universities that are tax funded should choose between charging tuition or accepting taxes. They're just as expensive as private ones more times than not. Airports should be private anyway, and they are accessable to anyone who can buy a ticket. What more do you want? No one is stopping them at the door saying you're too poor to fly. But they do tell people they make too much money to qualify for all sorts of government aid. Next you'll say rich people are being refused Greyhound tickets. Tax breaks? Has not this entire thread (except when derailed) been about everyone paying their 'fair share' and not getting tax breaks or loopholes while lowering the overall bill for everyone?

What avatar did you prefer? Dr. Who? The Host? Captain Haddock? Lo Pan?

 

[DiamondDave]

"Socialism will only work with a society of prisoners, slaves, and robots who can be controlled by the ruling elite (which will always exist in that type of system).

And funny how socialism is something to be forced upon the 'people', and not really for the socialists themselves"

The above is taken from your signature message.

If you believe that right-wing propaganda I respectfully suggest you research Denmark, which is a recognized socialist nation -- and is considered the "happiest" nation in the world.
Denmark: The Happiest Place on Earth - ABC News

The fact that your belief system is predicated on a false premise means your intellectual compass is defective. So unless you wish to remain adrift you need to correct that error.

The income tax in Denmark ranges from 42.9% to 63% progressively... lest we forget their 25% VAT... some of the highest in the world... ... yeah.. that makes most people SO happy

I don't put much weight on news fluff surveys or university project surveys... sorry

 

[thereisnospoon]

the rich benefit from government works....the airports are for them, not for the poorest...we gave them 15 billion in one month after 9/11....was that for the poor? I think not....

we gave the banks a trillion and counting....was that for the poor? I think NOT.....

We bailed GM, ford, chrysler out, was that for the poor....I think NOT. We put in universities, was that for the poorest, I think NOT.
we fund medical research and development...is that really for the poor, I think NOT.
We give tax breaks to couples sending their children to college....was that for the poorest? I think not...

me thinks you have blinders on big Fitz and.....

I liked your other avatar better!

Why are you obsessed with the poor?
What do you do for the poor? Are you one of these suburban libs who thinks serving turkey at a Salvation Army shelter once a year renders you some sort of moral superiority?
I am pretty sick of you people who use the poor as a tool to further your political agenda.

 

[thereisnospoon]

the rich benefit from government works....the airports are for them, not for the poorest...we gave them 15 billion in one month after 9/11....was that for the poor? I think not....

we gave the banks a trillion and counting....was that for the poor? I think NOT.....

We bailed GM, ford, chrysler out, was that for the poor....I think NOT. We put in universities, was that for the poorest, I think NOT.
we fund medical research and development...is that really for the poor, I think NOT.
We give tax breaks to couples sending their children to college....was that for the poorest? I think not...

me thinks you have blinders on big Fitz and.....

I liked your other avatar better!

Care for all....No, you don't. Based on your posts you object to anything or anyone capable of creating and/or keeping employment.

 

[Kuros]

nothing like writing discrimination against successful people into the tax code. So much for equality under the law I guess.

Another idiot heard from.

Hey, didn't you also get all riled up on race based bake sales put on by campus republicans? The whiter you were, the higher the price?


Apparently the more successful you are the more you pay for less access to government. This is not discrimination how?

It is discrimination, but its reasonable discrimination. Kind of how we give social security to people who are 70 years old but not to those who are 20 years old.

You seem to be under the impression that dollars earned per year is some sort of immutable characteristic, or that making $1 million in 12 months makes one a discrete and insular minority.

Everyone in America pays the same amount of tax on the same amount of money under the Federal income tax code (at least until deductions are taken into account). The millionaire pays the exact same tax rate as the guy who works at McDonalds . . . at least to the first $10,000/year each earns. Those who are similarly situated are treated exactly the same.

 

[Big Fitz]

The fact that 10% of a million dollars is still more than 10% of 10,000 dollars seems to elude the high tax bracket fans. As if having more money means they don't deserve to keep the same percentage as a poor person.

 

[Trajan]

the rich benefit from government works....the airports are for them, not for the poorest...we gave them 15 billion in one month after 9/11....was that for the poor? I think not....

we gave the banks a trillion and counting....was that for the poor? I think NOT.....

We bailed GM, ford, chrysler out, was that for the poor....I think NOT. We put in universities, was that for the poorest, I think NOT.
we fund medical research and development...is that really for the poor, I think NOT.
We give tax breaks to couples sending their children to college....was that for the poorest? I think not...

me thinks you have blinders on big Fitz and.....

I liked your other avatar better!

uhm who built all that stuff care?

 

[Google]

The fact that 10% of a million dollars is still more than 10% of 10,000 dollars seems to elude the high tax bracket fans. As if having more money means they don't deserve to keep the same percentage as a poor person.

As the left has a real problem with math.

 

[The T]

The fact that 10% of a million dollars is still more than 10% of 10,000 dollars seems to elude the high tax bracket fans. As if having more money means they don't deserve to keep the same percentage as a poor person.

It's still too much Case made for Flat or FAIR Tax. Repeal of the 16th and the IRS.

 

[Google]

The fact that nearly half of all Americans don't contribute anything to the federal tax burden, I believe, is the fundamental reason why Obama's rhetoric isn't as effective as it has been.

He's out there Carter-style speaking of how we all must equally eat his excrement sandwich he has prepared, but it is falling on deaf ears.

The desperation of the left to justify and rationalize why so many are against this administration on the debt ceiling is evident in the number of articles all of a sudden claiming a large majority want higher taxes. CBS had a story yesterday claiming 70% shun the GOP's plan, while simply side-stepping all polls showing over 50% oppose raising the debt ceiling.

You can't have 50% opposing raising the debt ceiling and 70% shunning the GOP's stance, it doesn't make sense.

 

[Kuros]

The fact that 10% of a million dollars is still more than 10% of 10,000 dollars seems to elude the high tax bracket fans. As if having more money means they don't deserve to keep the same percentage as a poor person.

Either you're being disingenuous or you're really slow. Please re-read what I wrote:

The millionaire pays the exact same tax rate as the guy who works at McDonalds . . . at least to the first $10,000/year each earns. Those who are similarly situated are treated exactly the same.

A millionaire and someone who works at McDonalds are not similarly situated. Got it? The difference in treatment is founded on a rational basis, namely income disparity, in furtherance of a legitimate end, the gov't gathering income. Please read up on Equal Protection theory.

 

[Big Fitz]

The fact that 10% of a million dollars is still more than 10% of 10,000 dollars seems to elude the high tax bracket fans. As if having more money means they don't deserve to keep the same percentage as a poor person.

Either you're being disingenuous or you're really slow. Please re-read what I wrote:

The millionaire pays the exact same tax rate as the guy who works at McDonalds . . . at least to the first $10,000/year each earns. Those who are similarly situated are treated exactly the same.

A millionaire and someone who works at McDonalds are not similarly situated. Got it? The difference in treatment is founded on a rational basis, namely income disparity, in furtherance of a legitimate end, the gov't gathering income. Please read up on Equal Protection theory.

Income disparity is NOT a rational basis. It is based completely on envy and the belief that someone that has more deserves to be treated less equally.

 

[Kuros]

The fact that 10% of a million dollars is still more than 10% of 10,000 dollars seems to elude the high tax bracket fans. As if having more money means they don't deserve to keep the same percentage as a poor person.

Either you're being disingenuous or you're really slow. Please re-read what I wrote:

The millionaire pays the exact same tax rate as the guy who works at McDonalds . . . at least to the first $10,000/year each earns. Those who are similarly situated are treated exactly the same.

A millionaire and someone who works at McDonalds are not similarly situated. Got it? The difference in treatment is founded on a rational basis, namely income disparity, in furtherance of a legitimate end, the gov't gathering income. Please read up on Equal Protection theory.

Income disparity is NOT a rational basis. It is based completely on envy and the belief that someone that has more deserves to be treated less equally.

No, no. Grousing on an internet chatboard about how half of the country didn't have to pay income taxes two years after the fact is a phenomenon completely centered on envy.

Tax rates that reasonably scale upward with income is historically stable and successful social policy. It has its roots in equitable principles. It also finds justification in the income-to-happiness ratio.

 

[Ravi]

The fact that nearly half of all Americans don't contribute anything to the federal tax burden, I believe, is the fundamental reason why Obama's rhetoric isn't as effective as it has been.

He's out there Carter-style speaking of how we all must equally eat his excrement sandwich he has prepared, but it is falling on deaf ears.

The desperation of the left to justify and rationalize why so many are against this administration on the debt ceiling is evident in the number of articles all of a sudden claiming a large majority want higher taxes. CBS had a story yesterday claiming 70% shun the GOP's plan, while simply side-stepping all polls showing over 50% oppose raising the debt ceiling.

You can't have 50% opposing raising the debt ceiling and 70% shunning the GOP's stance, it doesn't make sense.

I hate to break it to you, but polls are swinging Obama's way. The majority of Americans are sick of the phoniness the Republicans have exhibited over the debt ceiling.

Oh, and a lot of those that don't pay their taxes are the wealthy.

 

[Big Fitz]

Either you're being disingenuous or you're really slow. Please re-read what I wrote:



A millionaire and someone who works at McDonalds are not similarly situated. Got it? The difference in treatment is founded on a rational basis, namely income disparity, in furtherance of a legitimate end, the gov't gathering income. Please read up on Equal Protection theory.

Income disparity is NOT a rational basis. It is based completely on envy and the belief that someone that has more deserves to be treated less equally.

No, no. Grousing on an internet chatboard about how half of the country didn't have to pay income taxes two years after the fact is a phenomenon completely centered on envy.

Tax rates that reasonably scale upward with income is historically stable and successful social policy. It has its roots in equitable principles. It also finds justification in the income-to-happiness ratio.

I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you over your charts setting off my irrelevancy alarms, and my 'flip the subject' trim gauge. So demanding everyone pay the same rate regardless of income is envy?

Yeah. that's it.

You know... if you didn't engage in intellectual dishonesty, you couldn't use the word 'intellectual' describing your statements.

 

[The T]

The fact that 10% of a million dollars is still more than 10% of 10,000 dollars seems to elude the high tax bracket fans. As if having more money means they don't deserve to keep the same percentage as a poor person.

Either you're being disingenuous or you're really slow. Please re-read what I wrote:

The millionaire pays the exact same tax rate as the guy who works at McDonalds . . . at least to the first $10,000/year each earns. Those who are similarly situated are treated exactly the same.

A millionaire and someone who works at McDonalds are not similarly situated. Got it? The difference in treatment is founded on a rational basis, namely income disparity, in furtherance of a legitimate end, the gov't gathering income. Please read up on Equal Protection theory.

Income disparity is NOT a rational basis. It is based completely on envy and the belief that someone that has more deserves to be treated less equally.

And use the power of the imperial FED under the threat of force to make it so. You are addressing the moocher class here.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The fact that 10% of a million dollars is still more than 10% of 10,000 dollars seems to elude the high tax bracket fans. As if having more money means they don't deserve to keep the same percentage as a poor person.

Either you're being disingenuous or you're really slow. Please re-read what I wrote:

The millionaire pays the exact same tax rate as the guy who works at McDonalds . . . at least to the first $10,000/year each earns. Those who are similarly situated are treated exactly the same.

A millionaire and someone who works at McDonalds are not similarly situated. Got it? The difference in treatment is founded on a rational basis, namely income disparity, in furtherance of a legitimate end, the gov't gathering income. Please read up on Equal Protection theory.

Genius. It's equal protection( under the law) NOT equality of outcome.
Please stop using income difference as a rationalization for higher tax rates or redistribution of wealth.

 

[Article 15]

The progressive system, by nature ensures a change to the playing field (income) and inherently creates the inequality in treatment...

Like I said.. I fully believe you see and know this... but desperately try to continue to defend someone else paying more of a % than you...

Personally, I think you are just projecting your own issue on me.

Does the person who earns 50k in taxable income pay the same rate on dollars 20k-25k earned as the persona who earns 27 million? Yes or no?

If that 50k person were to begin making 27 million would they pay at a different rate than the guy already making that much and vice versa? Yes or no?

Again.. you are acting as if dollars 1-20000 never existed... so you are changing the playing field.. I simply insist that they are earned just as all the other dollars are...

You are simply disguising your method for a subjective progressive system

No surprise that you avoided my questions.

But again, I'm not acting like dollars 1-20000 never existed. Where do you even come up with this nonsense? I've clearly stated that as long as 1-20000 are taxed at the same rate, for everyone, whether it's a flat rate in a flat tax system or in a tax bracket (even if that bracket is zero) in a progressive tax system then you cannot cry "unfair" or "unequal."