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

[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.

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.

Nobody is talking about redistribution of wealth. You need taxation + spending for that. Right now we are justifying taxation ONLY. If you want to get into the massive wealth transfers from the middle class to the wealthy via defense spending and bloat I'll be happy to get into that.

I am talking about equal protection under the law. I even provided a link explaining the doctrine so you folks could follow what I was saying. Income taxation is not only an enumerated power under the Federal Constitution, but distinctions outside of race, alienage, nationality, or gender fall under rational basis review. THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE DOES NOT HELP YOUR ARGUMENT. You can lead a horse to water . . .

 

[dblack]

I think the opposition to the flat-rate income tax including a 20k exemption is fairly hilarious. Those of you whinging about it being 'progressive' are really looking to drown the baby in the bathwater. In point of fact, such a scheme would be vastly less "progressive" than what we have now. And, combined with eliminating all the idiotic deductions and 'incentives', it would create a straightforward system far more fair, far more predictable, and far more conducive to economic growth than the mess we have now.

 

[thereisnospoon]

The income is taxed.. but the rules are based on circumstances of the persons and their individual situations.. making it about the person... when you eliminate all that complicated bullshit, you take that personalization out of the situation... the more personalization you have, the more you open the door for subjective bullshit exceptions, like we have now

Scary as this may be, I'm gonna side with Ravi on this.

It is reasonable to put a basic allowance, as has already been given, say $20,000. So no one pays tax on the first $20k. Over that, for every buck, you pay a percentage. Sure that would mean those who earn more pay more but that is also quite reasonable. We are not a society of neanderthals, we do need to pay our fair share. The issue is what is fair? Is it fair for you to pay and me not? No. It is fair that we all have a basic figure before tax kicks in, and that everyone pays the same percentage on anything over that amount.

I don't disagree with you with saying a sales tax is a more equal way to pay, everyone chooses whether or not they buy an item or not, and everyone pays the same rate of tax on anything they buy. In theory, that's a great solution. However, every single country where this has been implemented have ended up with a sales tax AND income tax. Britain is great example of this fiasco. Back in the 70s, they sold the concept of their VAT (or sales tax) as an eventual replacement for income tax - which they said would be phased out. Has that happened? No. What they have is 23% income tax (along with 40% and 50% for higher earners) and 20% sales tax.

The problem basically is this:

Who the hell would trust a ******* government to keep their promise? I certainly wouldn't. Their track record is evidence of government bullshit.

Yeah, me, too. Is hell freezing over?

The VAT is a great idea (similar to a consumption tax), but eliminate all other taxes. Otherwise, a flat tax will do. The idea of a progressive tax is stupid (where tax percentage goes up with income) and only leads to problems (as I mentioned in another post).

The main problem with a VAT is trying to regulate or eliminate the underground economy.
With a VAT law, retailers would then be required to not only collect state and local sales taxes but the federal VAT as well.
Seeing a way to avoid paying up, many people would do more of their business in cash with unconventional retailers such as flea markets. Others such as small businesses like landscapers would demand payment in cash to not leave a paper trail.
Another thing people will do is avoid banks. Instead of depositing their paychecks in the bank they may hold cash just to keep government from tracking their spending.
Really the only way a VAT could work nearly flawlessly is we entered into a cashless society where all transactions would be electronic.

 

[oreo]

hell, just making sure nobody gets paid back MORE than they paid in out of that bottom 51% would be a good start. Second Christmas needs to end.

Yeah--the "earned income tax credit"--has got to go. This is where you earn a few hundred dollars a year--pay absolutely no taxes on it--and the federal government aka the taxpayers of this country send you a check for $1000.00.

It's basically a Welfare check you didn't even have to ask for.

 

[Article 15]

I think the opposition to the flat-rate income tax including a 20k exemption is fairly hilarious. Those of you whinging about it being 'progressive' are really looking to drown the baby in the bathwater. In point of fact, such a scheme would be vastly less "progressive" than what we have now. And, combined with eliminating all the idiotic deductions and 'incentives', it would create a straightforward system far more fair, far more predictable, and far more conducive to economic growth than the mess we have now.

Ideologues tend to be retarded like that.

 

[Article 15]

hell, just making sure nobody gets paid back MORE than they paid in out of that bottom 51% would be a good start. Second Christmas needs to end.

Yeah--the "earned income tax credit"--has got to go. This is where you earn a few hundred dollars a year--pay absolutely no taxes on it--and the federal government aka the taxpayers of this country send you a check for $1000.00.

It's basically a Welfare check you didn't even have to ask for.

What a great deal. I think I will quit my job and set up a lemonade stand so I can get in on that.

 

[thereisnospoon]

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.

_Polls? Anyone who mentions polls as their rebuttal is out of gas.
Polls are for the uninformed and easily led.
The Left tried this poll bull shit last year. They claimed the polls showed the democrats were going to lose seats in the House and Senate but would maintain a sizable majority in the House and a slight one in the Senate. The idea was to discourage GOP voters from going to the polls.
Polls doin't mean shit.
Listen to what people are saying. See how ******* pissed off they are with the Obama admin. That is REAL.
Obama is playing politics with trillions of dollars that belong to the people of the United States of America. We've had it!

 

[oreo]

hell, just making sure nobody gets paid back MORE than they paid in out of that bottom 51% would be a good start. Second Christmas needs to end.

Yeah--the "earned income tax credit"--has got to go. This is where you earn a few hundred dollars a year--pay absolutely no taxes on it--and the federal government aka the taxpayers of this country send you a check for $1000.00.

It's basically a Welfare check you didn't even have to ask for.

What a great deal. I think I will quit my job and set up a lemonade stand so I can get in on that.

The "earned income tax credit" has been there for decades--UNFORTUNATELY. The welfare check you never asked for but got anyway.

 

[Kuros]

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.

_Polls? Anyone who mentions polls as their rebuttal is out of gas.
Polls are for the uninformed and easily led.
The Left tried this poll bull shit last year. They claimed the polls showed the democrats were going to lose seats in the House and Senate but would maintain a sizable majority in the House and a slight one in the Senate. The idea was to discourage GOP voters from going to the polls.
Polls doin't mean shit.
Listen to what people are saying. See how ******* pissed off they are with the Obama admin. That is REAL.
Obama is playing politics with trillions of dollars that belong to the people of the United States of America. We've had it!

Polls > mere anecdotal evidence

Now watch. I'll be accused of defending polls.

 

[oreo]

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.

_Polls? Anyone who mentions polls as their rebuttal is out of gas.
Polls are for the uninformed and easily led.
The Left tried this poll bull shit last year. They claimed the polls showed the democrats were going to lose seats in the House and Senate but would maintain a sizable majority in the House and a slight one in the Senate. The idea was to discourage GOP voters from going to the polls.
Polls doin't mean shit.
Listen to what people are saying. See how ******* pissed off they are with the Obama admin. That is REAL.
Obama is playing politics with trillions of dollars that belong to the people of the United States of America. We've had it!

Polls > mere anecdotal evidence

Now watch. I'll be accused of defending polls.

Polls are all over the place--but democrats have been whipping up some polls themselves to prop up the Messiah.

Lets face it--if some miracle in job growth doesn't happen SOON--you could run Daffy Duck against Barack Obama and the duck would win.

Americans ALWAYS vote their wallets--it has always been that way--and it's always going to be that way.

 

[MikeK]

[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.

George W. Bush reduced taxes on his "base," which consists of the wealthiest Americans -- billionaires and multi-millionaires. The cost of that reduction was approximately $1.3 trillion. The current debt crisis could be effectively relieved by allowing those tax cuts to expire and doing so would not impose a significantly negative effect on those excessively wealthy individuals. Instead, that privileged category has lobbied the Republican Congress to resist any such tax increase but instead to seek reductions in the Social Security allotments and to curtail the benefits of Medicare and Medicaid, actions which would impose serious hardship on millions of seniors and impoverished persons. And you believe envy is the reason for the Progressive position in this conflict?

There are more appropriate words than envy to define the emotional response to this situation.

 

[oreo]

[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.

George W. Bush reduced taxes on his "base," which consists of the wealthiest Americans -- billionaires and multi-millionaires. The cost of that reduction was approximately $1.3 trillion. The current debt crisis could be effectively relieved by allowing those tax cuts to expire and doing so would not impose a significantly negative effect on those excessively wealthy individuals. Instead, that privileged category has lobbied the Republican Congress to resist any such tax increase but instead to seek reductions in the Social Security allotments and to curtail the benefits of Medicare and Medicaid, actions which would impose serious hardship on millions of seniors and impoverished persons. And you believe envy is the reason for the Progressive position in this conflict?

There are more appropriate words than envy to define the emotional response to this situation.

Look here is the real PROBLEM.

Right now there are 18,000 baby boomers entering social security-medicare daily and this will continue for the next 15 years--resulting in another 64 trillion in unfunded liabilites on top of the 14.3 trillion in red ink right now. This equates to $534,000.00 per household debt owed to the Federal Government.

There isn't enough wealth in this entire country for the Federal Government to confiscate to pay this tab.



one billion dollars--$100.00 bills stacked on palets

'

one trillion dollars $100.00 bills stacked on palets. NOTE: how small the man is in this chart.

Basically we need approximately 80 of the trillion dollar chart to break even. 1.3 trillion in Bush tax cuts--doesn't even scratch the surface on this debt.

 

[bripat9643]

George W. Bush reduced taxes on his "base," which consists of the wealthiest Americans -- billionaires and multi-millionaires. The cost of that reduction was approximately $1.3 trillion. The current debt crisis could be effectively relieved by allowing those tax cuts to expire and doing so would not impose a significantly negative effect on those excessively wealthy individuals. Instead, that privileged category has lobbied the Republican Congress to resist any such tax increase but instead to seek reductions in the Social Security allotments and to curtail the benefits of Medicare and Medicaid, actions which would impose serious hardship on millions of seniors and impoverished persons. And you believe envy is the reason for the Progressive position in this conflict?

You could tax away 100% of the income of everyone making over $250K and it wouldn't make a dent in the budget deficit. I find it difficult to believe that anyone is stupid enough to genuinely believe that tax increases are the solution to the budget deficit.

There are more appropriate words than envy to define the emotional response to this situation.

True, you can add stupidity to the list.

 

[oreo]

George W. Bush reduced taxes on his "base," which consists of the wealthiest Americans -- billionaires and multi-millionaires. The cost of that reduction was approximately $1.3 trillion. The current debt crisis could be effectively relieved by allowing those tax cuts to expire and doing so would not impose a significantly negative effect on those excessively wealthy individuals. Instead, that privileged category has lobbied the Republican Congress to resist any such tax increase but instead to seek reductions in the Social Security allotments and to curtail the benefits of Medicare and Medicaid, actions which would impose serious hardship on millions of seniors and impoverished persons. And you believe envy is the reason for the Progressive position in this conflict?

There are more appropriate words than envy to define the emotional response to this situation.

You could tax away 100% of the income of everyone making over $250K and it wouldn't make a dent in the budget deficit. I find it difficult to believe that anyone is stupid enough to genuinely believe that tax increases are the solution to the budget deficit.

You could take EVERYONE'S wealth including confiscating paychecks and it still wouldn't pay this tab.

 

[bripat9643]

Nobody is talking about redistribution of wealth. You need taxation + spending for that. Right now we are justifying taxation ONLY. If you want to get into the massive wealth transfers from the middle class to the wealthy via defense spending and bloat I'll be happy to get into that.

Defense spending goes mostly to the middle class - well paid engineers and computer programs who work for defense contractors, so your lament is misdirected and idiotic. Libs simply hate the military and blame it for all the ills of of the world.

Obama already did the spending. That's what his "stimulus" bill was all about. That has now been incorporated into the baseline for all federal budgets. Spending first, and then using the resulting deficit to justify huge tax increases on the wealthy.

That is the essence of class warfare.

I am talking about equal protection under the law. I even provided a link explaining the doctrine so you folks could follow what I was saying. Income taxation is not only an enumerated power under the Federal Constitution, but distinctions outside of race, alienage, nationality, or gender fall under rational basis review. THE EQUAL PROTECTION CLAUSE DOES NOT HELP YOUR ARGUMENT. You can lead a horse to water . . .

There is no such thing as "rational basis review" in the Constitution.

 

[bripat9643]

Another idiot heard from.

How utterly ironic!

 

[bripat9643]

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....

Airports are funded with user fees, dipstick. The cost is included in the price of your ticket. In other words, the people who use them are the ones who pay for them.

So much of your moronic class warfare bullshit, eh?

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

Obama is the one who gave a trillion dollars to the banks. Ask him.

We bailed GM, ford, chrysler out, was that for the poor....I think NOT.

No, that was for rich, overpaid, fat, lazy UAW thugs - one of Obama's main constituents. Again, you can blame Obama for that. If you don't like corporate welfare, then you should be voting for anyone but a Democrat, it seems.

We put in universities, was that for the poorest, I think NOT.

Great, let's cut government funding for universities to zero. I'm all for it.

we fund medical research and development...is that really for the poor, I think NOT.

Yes it is, dipstick. Do you actually believe the poor don't benefit from medical research? That would be true stupidity.

We give tax breaks to couples sending their children to college....was that for the poorest? I think not...

Fine. Eliminate tax credits for college. I'm sure the leftwing professors will love that.

 

[Bigfoot]

The problem isn't taxes, its spending. I don't care if they raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans or if they do not. If they do I think the folks that will be paying more to the government deserve a higher level of competency as to how those funds are used. This federal corruption of padding each others pockets and your friends and relatives being awarded government contracts has to be prosecuted as any other crooked business practice would be. This out of control spending by both parties has to stop and Obama should have his key to coffers taken away permanently before he drags our entire country over the abyss.

 

[edthecynic]

George W. Bush reduced taxes on his "base," which consists of the wealthiest Americans -- billionaires and multi-millionaires. The cost of that reduction was approximately $1.3 trillion. The current debt crisis could be effectively relieved by allowing those tax cuts to expire and doing so would not impose a significantly negative effect on those excessively wealthy individuals. Instead, that privileged category has lobbied the Republican Congress to resist any such tax increase but instead to seek reductions in the Social Security allotments and to curtail the benefits of Medicare and Medicaid, actions which would impose serious hardship on millions of seniors and impoverished persons. And you believe envy is the reason for the Progressive position in this conflict?

There are more appropriate words than envy to define the emotional response to this situation.

You could tax away 100% of the income of everyone making over $250K and it wouldn't make a dent in the budget deficit. I find it difficult to believe that anyone is stupid enough to genuinely believe that tax increases are the solution to the budget deficit.

You could take EVERYONE'S wealth including confiscating paychecks and it still wouldn't pay this tab.

CON$ are the most misinformed ignorant boobs on the planet! GOP hate radio tells them crap and they mindlessly parrot it on these public messageboards. We have over 50 trillion in total wealth!!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Liberals want everybody to be as miserable as they are. Its always been that way. It is the foundation of their thinking.

Being bitter is gay.