I Feel Sorry For Democrats

[the_human_being]

I don't recall if any candidate has put forward a plan for a national sales tax which would make a lot of sense. Ted Cruz has posted on his web site his plan for a 10% flat tax which makes good sense and would result in practically gutting the corrupt IRS. His flat tax would let everyone above a set income level have skin in the game.

It's moronic ideas like that which is why Cruz will never be president of the United States. Such a foolish tax plan would produce about $1.5 trillion in revenue -- not even enough to cover current expenditures for military, non-discretionary items, and debt service. Even worse for such an idiotic plan ... is that we currently spend about $3.5 trillion per year, meaning Cruz will immediately skyrocket the national budget deficit to around $2 trillion.

More evidence that rightards shriek before they think.

Ironic that Bernie's economic plan is figured to cost $18 Trillion over ten years.

 

[Faun]

I said 1/3 don't work, therefore, don't pay income taxes. That's not wrong. I said nothing about the total number of people paying no federal taxes. Who do you expect to pay income taxes if not those earning money?

We're not talking about just those that earn money. If that was the case, I would have no objection. We're talking about people with a lot of money--people that have been supporting the rest of the country for many years now.

Personally I'm for a progressive consumption tax, that way everybody pays. When our politicians spend more, our consumption tax increases. Everybody has skin in the game.

That's what we have in the county I live in. In Cuyahoga County, we pay 7.75 cents on every dollar that changes hands. The rich pay this tax, the middle-class pay this tax, and the poor pay this tax.

It's so invitingly easy when government says "I'm going to give you this, I'm going to give you that, I'm going to give you a lot of between" and then foots the bill to somebody else.

A consumption tax is not an awful idea, but it does shift too much of the overall tax burden upon the lower income workers.

If they're such low income, it means they can't consume as much, therefore, not paying as much.

Learn to read. I didn't say they'd be paying as much. I said too much of the tax burden would be shifted to them.

Not if they're paying their fair share. Currently, almost half the country pays nothing in income taxes. That's not a fair share since the rest of us have had the burden shifted to us for too long. It's high time those paying nothing start paying something for living in society.

Here ya go...

Federal Income Tax Brackets 2015​

... Show me which tax bracket is exempt from paying taxes....

 

[Faun]

I don't recall if any candidate has put forward a plan for a national sales tax which would make a lot of sense. Ted Cruz has posted on his web site his plan for a 10% flat tax which makes good sense and would result in practically gutting the corrupt IRS. His flat tax would let everyone above a set income level have skin in the game.

It's moronic ideas like that which is why Cruz will never be president of the United States. Such a foolish tax plan would produce about $1.5 trillion in revenue -- not even enough to cover current expenditures for military, non-discretionary items, and debt service. Even worse for such an idiotic plan ... is that we currently spend about $3.5 trillion per year, meaning Cruz will immediately skyrocket the national budget deficit to around $2 trillion.

More evidence that rightards shriek before they think.

Ironic that Bernie's economic plan is figured to cost $18 Trillion over ten years.

Not as ironic as you believing that figure.

But since you do.... explain what part of Sanders' will cost $18 trillion in 10 years......

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I do. I really do feel sorry for Democrats. The last couple of days have been devastating to the Democrat Party. On Saturday night, their candidates came off silly, inept, and without substance in their national debate, which only drew a viewership of 8.5 million. Although the debate was geared toward ISIS and the Paris attacks, none of the Democrat candidates came off as being a viable candidate for Commander-in-Chief.

France, today launched an attack upon the very stronghold of ISIS, something our impotent President has either failed or refused to do. Russia's Putin is in Syria alongside Iran's military shoring up the Assad regime which our President spent millions of our tax dollars trying to oust.

Coupled with the Democrat candidates' failures to offer the American voter anything other than job killing policies and the same old boogeymen they trot out at every election and the total lack of a candidate that exhibits any real qualities of leadership as required and becoming of an aspirant to hold authority over the world's most powerful military, I see the American people turning yet again to a Republican President to put a final end to ISIS. The American people have done it before and will do it again.

There is more to being President than tax and spend.

Oh, by the way. I really DON'T feel sorry for the Democrats. I lied.

Right on. These demorat candidates need to be more sharing about how many times they've hit their moms with hammers or tried stabbing their best friends.

Yes, liberals seem to love to dwell on our candidates childhood days. But Obama doped up in college? Not a problem there.

What happens in college stays in college

Bush was addicted

Addicted to what? What happens in college stays in college unless you write about it in your very own book.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Our government goodies don't come from FICA, State taxes, City taxes and so on. Nearly your entire social program system is out of federal income taxes, just like our military is from federal income taxes, and roads, and bridges and.......

And you're wrong about one-third. Nearly half of Americans pay no federal income taxes. In essence, one half of our country is supporting the other half. Yet when you complain about who's paying what, you want the half that is paying to pay even more.

I said 1/3 don't work, therefore, don't pay income taxes. That's not wrong. I said nothing about the total number of people paying no federal taxes. Who do you expect to pay income taxes if not those earning money?

The conversation is about the 49% of all American earners who pay no federal personal income tax (as opposed to the top 25% who carry 86% of that tax load).

I believe you to be bright enough to know that figure does not include non-filers - the 2/3 of Americans who don't work, so I'm forced to conclude you are trying to fudge the facts and derail the discussion.

Faun has fudged the issue a bit. It isn't that half of all Americans pay no federal income tax but rather that 49% of all earners - those filing tax returns - pay none.

I said 1/3 of Americans don't work, and therefore, pay no taxes. What part of that do you imagine is fudged?

Actually over 2/3 of all Americans don't work but again you attempt to fudge the topic.

The discussion, as you well know, was about just those who work, file tax returns, and pay no federal personal income tax. As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax.

None ... Zilch ... Nada ... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load.

So what would satisfy you?

96%?

106%?

First, it was Ray who said half of Americans don't pay taxes. Secondly, with 100 million not working out of a civilian noninstitutional population of 250 million is 40%. Thirdly, while the top 50% of income workers pay 97%, they don't pay all of the taxes. Fourthly, who should pay the bulk of the taxes if not the highest wage earners? Fifthly, the answer to your question is about 96%.

Actually it's more like 47% of wage earners in this country pay no income tax. Add in all the people not working, it's certainly much, much more.

Why did Republicans slash taxes on the 47% so they paid nothing?

So they could get bigger cuts for billionaires

Many people didn't pay income tax in the past either.

 

[rightwinger]

I do. I really do feel sorry for Democrats. The last couple of days have been devastating to the Democrat Party. On Saturday night, their candidates came off silly, inept, and without substance in their national debate, which only drew a viewership of 8.5 million. Although the debate was geared toward ISIS and the Paris attacks, none of the Democrat candidates came off as being a viable candidate for Commander-in-Chief.

France, today launched an attack upon the very stronghold of ISIS, something our impotent President has either failed or refused to do. Russia's Putin is in Syria alongside Iran's military shoring up the Assad regime which our President spent millions of our tax dollars trying to oust.

Coupled with the Democrat candidates' failures to offer the American voter anything other than job killing policies and the same old boogeymen they trot out at every election and the total lack of a candidate that exhibits any real qualities of leadership as required and becoming of an aspirant to hold authority over the world's most powerful military, I see the American people turning yet again to a Republican President to put a final end to ISIS. The American people have done it before and will do it again.

There is more to being President than tax and spend.

Oh, by the way. I really DON'T feel sorry for the Democrats. I lied.

Right on. These demorat candidates need to be more sharing about how many times they've hit their moms with hammers or tried stabbing their best friends.

Yes, liberals seem to love to dwell on our candidates childhood days. But Obama doped up in college? Not a problem there.

What happens in college stays in college

Bush was addicted

Addicted to what? What happens in college stays in college unless you write about it in your very own book.

http://www.drugfree.org/join-together/reflections-bush-talks-about-his-own-drug-addiction-problems/

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The problem is half of our country is not paying. In fact, the top 10% of wage earners in this country pay close to 70% of all collected income taxes.

If 70% is not enough for them to pay, then what is?

That's your problem?

You said paying taxes is "robbery." Are you saying now it's only robbery depending on who pays taxes? Roughly 1/3 of people in the U.S. don't work and don't pay income tax. The vast majority of folks pay taxes as most states charge sales tax. Some pay more than others.

Our government goodies don't come from FICA, State taxes, City taxes and so on. Nearly your entire social program system is out of federal income taxes, just like our military is from federal income taxes, and roads, and bridges and.......

And you're wrong about one-third. Nearly half of Americans pay no federal income taxes. In essence, one half of our country is supporting the other half. Yet when you complain about who's paying what, you want the half that is paying to pay even more.

Faun has fudged the issue a bit. It isn't that half of all Americans pay no federal income tax but rather that 49% of all earners - those filing tax returns - pay none.

I said 1/3 of Americans don't work, and therefore, pay no taxes. What part of that do you imagine is fudged?

It would be interesting to know why 1/3 of Americans don't work. I am reasonably sure a good percentage are over the age of 65 and retired. There are other valid reasons for a person to not work due to mental or physical disability. By the same token, their are many people over 65 and who are disabled that do hold down jobs. The question I have is how many able bodied men and women don't work because they just don't want too?

That's pretty much it. There has been a boom since DumBama took office of people not looking for work. People realize the DumBama is the social program king and since he took over, we have records in food stamp usage and those not looking for work. But we also have record amounts of people filing for disability whether they can work or not:

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the growth in disability insurance beneficiaries has more to do with an aging population. There are other factors that could explain declining labor force participation. For example, “[d]ownward moves in labor-force participation can be attributed in part to increasing school enrollment” as more young people seek higher education, according to the Center for American Progress.

But the main factor is just “discouragement with the economy,” said Ruetschlin. “The idea that the benefits of going out and looking for a job in the market are far outweighed by the costs.”

Fewer Americans are working--or even looking for work. Why?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I do. I really do feel sorry for Democrats. The last couple of days have been devastating to the Democrat Party. On Saturday night, their candidates came off silly, inept, and without substance in their national debate, which only drew a viewership of 8.5 million. Although the debate was geared toward ISIS and the Paris attacks, none of the Democrat candidates came off as being a viable candidate for Commander-in-Chief.

France, today launched an attack upon the very stronghold of ISIS, something our impotent President has either failed or refused to do. Russia's Putin is in Syria alongside Iran's military shoring up the Assad regime which our President spent millions of our tax dollars trying to oust.

Coupled with the Democrat candidates' failures to offer the American voter anything other than job killing policies and the same old boogeymen they trot out at every election and the total lack of a candidate that exhibits any real qualities of leadership as required and becoming of an aspirant to hold authority over the world's most powerful military, I see the American people turning yet again to a Republican President to put a final end to ISIS. The American people have done it before and will do it again.

There is more to being President than tax and spend.

Oh, by the way. I really DON'T feel sorry for the Democrats. I lied.

Right on. These demorat candidates need to be more sharing about how many times they've hit their moms with hammers or tried stabbing their best friends.

Yes, liberals seem to love to dwell on our candidates childhood days. But Obama doped up in college? Not a problem there.

What happens in college stays in college

Bush was addicted

Addicted to what? What happens in college stays in college unless you write about it in your very own book.

http://www.drugfree.org/join-together/reflections-bush-talks-about-his-own-drug-addiction-problems/

Your site said he drank. Even Bush admits to that. A lot of people drank back then. That's not snorting coke like Hussein did when he was in college.

 

[Faun]

I feel sorry for Republicans

After eight years, it is "their turn" to return to the White House
The best they can come up with is Trump, Carson and Cruz

As I have said before....the next Republican President hasn't been born yet

Either one of them is far better than your two leading candidates. At least they have more going for them than tax and spend.

Suuure, uh-huh. a crank, a kook, and a Canuck.

 

[rightwinger]

Right on. These demorat candidates need to be more sharing about how many times they've hit their moms with hammers or tried stabbing their best friends.

Yes, liberals seem to love to dwell on our candidates childhood days. But Obama doped up in college? Not a problem there.

What happens in college stays in college

Bush was addicted

Addicted to what? What happens in college stays in college unless you write about it in your very own book.

Reflections: Bush Talks about His Own Drug Addiction Problems - Partnership for Drug-Free Kids

Your site said he drank. Even Bush admits to that. A lot of people drank back then. That's not snorting coke like Hussein did when he was in college.

He admits to drinking.......heavily
Other accounts say he did more.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Yes, liberals seem to love to dwell on our candidates childhood days. But Obama doped up in college? Not a problem there.

What happens in college stays in college

Bush was addicted

Addicted to what? What happens in college stays in college unless you write about it in your very own book.

Reflections: Bush Talks about His Own Drug Addiction Problems - Partnership for Drug-Free Kids

Your site said he drank. Even Bush admits to that. A lot of people drank back then. That's not snorting coke like Hussein did when he was in college.

He admits to drinking.......heavily
Other accounts say he did more.

Other accounts said Clinton raped women. Does that make Clinton a rapist?

 

[midcan5]

Weird how righties think of everything so narrowly. When finger pointing is all you do is it any wonder they fail to accomplish anything? Well you could give Bush and Cheney credit for creating daesh, aka isil. Not much of an accomplishment.

How do you stop alienated people who see the world through an ideology of us against them. Right now the bombing etc has emboldened a few who see the battle as their belief against western domination. Is there any need to mention our own crazies - cowards - such as Timothy McVeigh. In an armed society only a few cowards can wreak havoc and fear. One way to start is stop acting like these people are anything but murderers and cowards. Call them daesh as you hunt down those whose conscience is missing. A few pieces below. See words matter for daesh.

"I reach this view with much mixed feeling. Over the years I have grown increasingly convinced that western military interventions and wars to “fix” the Middle East have not only failed, but have vastly exacerbated nearly all regional situations. Washington has at the end of the day, in effect, “lost” every one of its recent wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, and elsewhere. The West has been as much the problem as the solution....We must remember that there would be no ISIS today if the US had not invaded and destroyed Iraq’s leadership, government, ruling institutions, elites, army, infrastructure and social order." ISIS- The Hour Has Struck | Graham E. Fuller

Paris at Midnight: Attempt to push France out of anti ISIL coalition in Syria?
Words matter in ‘ISIS’ war, so use ‘Daesh’ - The Boston Globe

"Since suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation and not Islamic fundamentalism, the use of heavy military force to transform Muslim societies over there, if you would, is only likely to increase the number of suicide terrorists coming at us." Robert Pape The Logic of Suicide Terrorism

"I consider Bush's decision to call for a war against terrorism a serious mistake. He is elevating these criminals to the status of war enemies, and one cannot lead a war against a network if the term war is to retain any definite meaning." Jurgen Habermas
.

 

[the_human_being]

I don't recall if any candidate has put forward a plan for a national sales tax which would make a lot of sense. Ted Cruz has posted on his web site his plan for a 10% flat tax which makes good sense and would result in practically gutting the corrupt IRS. His flat tax would let everyone above a set income level have skin in the game.

It's moronic ideas like that which is why Cruz will never be president of the United States. Such a foolish tax plan would produce about $1.5 trillion in revenue -- not even enough to cover current expenditures for military, non-discretionary items, and debt service. Even worse for such an idiotic plan ... is that we currently spend about $3.5 trillion per year, meaning Cruz will immediately skyrocket the national budget deficit to around $2 trillion.

More evidence that rightards shriek before they think.

Ironic that Bernie's economic plan is figured to cost $18 Trillion over ten years.

Not as ironic as you believing that figure.

But since you do.... explain what part of Sanders' will cost $18 trillion in 10 years......

He's not my candidate but here : Bernie Sanders' plans would cost $18 trillion

 

[Faun]

I feel sorry for Republicans

After eight years, it is "their turn" to return to the White House
The best they can come up with is Trump, Carson and Cruz

As I have said before....the next Republican President hasn't been born yet

Either one of them is far better than your two leading candidates. At least they have more going for them than tax and spend.

Hillary is beatable in 2016 by the right Republican with a moderate platform

This may be the last best chance for Republicans in the next generation. Instead they go all batshit crazy with Trump, Carson and Cruz

Are Republicans TRYING to blow it

Again, how about putting some actual substance from one of your candidates up here for discussion. Just smearing people doesn't cut it anymore. Your candidate must have a platform to run on. Put it up here.

Go for it

Hillary Clinton on the issues

Here you go: Hillary and Bernie's plans: Tax the wealthy more. Raise the taxes on corporations and close their tax loopholes. The wealthy are already paying the lion's share of the federal income tax. Taxing corporations more and closing their tax loopholes will only lead to more corporations moving out of the country, job loss, and result in lower returns on investments of our elderly and many others who invest in the stocks of corporations. Hillary and Bernie's plans will kill off more jobs in an already depressed economy. Bernie did admit that the actual unemployment rate was 10% - not 5.6% as is touted by the Obama Administration. Bernie also stated that the unemployment rate in the Black community was 15% and that the unemployment rate among Black males with a high school education was 51%. So much for the two leading candidates of the Democrat Party's plans for jobs creation and the overall economy.

Sounds like Trump's tax plan...

Trump hints at plan to raise taxes on the wealthy and eliminate it for others

 

[rightwinger]

What happens in college stays in college

Bush was addicted

Addicted to what? What happens in college stays in college unless you write about it in your very own book.

Reflections: Bush Talks about His Own Drug Addiction Problems - Partnership for Drug-Free Kids

Your site said he drank. Even Bush admits to that. A lot of people drank back then. That's not snorting coke like Hussein did when he was in college.

He admits to drinking.......heavily
Other accounts say he did more.

Other accounts said Clinton raped women. Does that make Clinton a rapist?

If you want to believe Bush was a choir boy....go at it

 

[rightwinger]

Either one of them is far better than your two leading candidates. At least they have more going for them than tax and spend.

Hillary is beatable in 2016 by the right Republican with a moderate platform

This may be the last best chance for Republicans in the next generation. Instead they go all batshit crazy with Trump, Carson and Cruz

Are Republicans TRYING to blow it

Again, how about putting some actual substance from one of your candidates up here for discussion. Just smearing people doesn't cut it anymore. Your candidate must have a platform to run on. Put it up here.

Go for it

Hillary Clinton on the issues

Here you go: Hillary and Bernie's plans: Tax the wealthy more. Raise the taxes on corporations and close their tax loopholes. The wealthy are already paying the lion's share of the federal income tax. Taxing corporations more and closing their tax loopholes will only lead to more corporations moving out of the country, job loss, and result in lower returns on investments of our elderly and many others who invest in the stocks of corporations. Hillary and Bernie's plans will kill off more jobs in an already depressed economy. Bernie did admit that the actual unemployment rate was 10% - not 5.6% as is touted by the Obama Administration. Bernie also stated that the unemployment rate in the Black community was 15% and that the unemployment rate among Black males with a high school education was 51%. So much for the two leading candidates of the Democrat Party's plans for jobs creation and the overall economy.

Sounds like Trump's tax plan...

Trump hints at plan to raise taxes on the wealthy and eliminate it for others

Trump is the only candidate pushing a plan that cuts taxes on himself

 

[the_human_being]

I do. I really do feel sorry for Democrats. The last couple of days have been devastating to the Democrat Party. On Saturday night, their candidates came off silly, inept, and without substance in their national debate, which only drew a viewership of 8.5 million. Although the debate was geared toward ISIS and the Paris attacks, none of the Democrat candidates came off as being a viable candidate for Commander-in-Chief.

France, today launched an attack upon the very stronghold of ISIS, something our impotent President has either failed or refused to do. Russia's Putin is in Syria alongside Iran's military shoring up the Assad regime which our President spent millions of our tax dollars trying to oust.

Coupled with the Democrat candidates' failures to offer the American voter anything other than job killing policies and the same old boogeymen they trot out at every election and the total lack of a candidate that exhibits any real qualities of leadership as required and becoming of an aspirant to hold authority over the world's most powerful military, I see the American people turning yet again to a Republican President to put a final end to ISIS. The American people have done it before and will do it again.

There is more to being President than tax and spend.

Oh, by the way. I really DON'T feel sorry for the Democrats. I lied.

Right on. These demorat candidates need to be more sharing about how many times they've hit their moms with hammers or tried stabbing their best friends.

Yes, liberals seem to love to dwell on our candidates childhood days. But Obama doped up in college? Not a problem there.

What happens in college stays in college

Bush was addicted

Addicted to what? What happens in college stays in college unless you write about it in your very own book.

http://www.drugfree.org/join-together/reflections-bush-talks-about-his-own-drug-addiction-problems/

At least he doesn't try to cover it up: White House Contradicted on Clinton Cocaine Use

 

[the_human_being]

Right on. These demorat candidates need to be more sharing about how many times they've hit their moms with hammers or tried stabbing their best friends.

Yes, liberals seem to love to dwell on our candidates childhood days. But Obama doped up in college? Not a problem there.

What happens in college stays in college

Bush was addicted

Addicted to what? What happens in college stays in college unless you write about it in your very own book.

http://www.drugfree.org/join-together/reflections-bush-talks-about-his-own-drug-addiction-problems/

At least he doesn't try to cover it up: White House Contradicted on Clinton Cocaine Use

OK. Show us the beef. You said it, now post your link.

 

[Faun]

The discussion, as you well know, was about those who work, file tax returns, and pay no federal personal income tax. As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax...

First, it was Ray who said half of Americans don't pay taxes. Secondly, with 100 million not working out of a civilian noninstitutional population of 250 million is 40%...

I'm not certain what you mean by "non-institutional" Americans but as of July 4th, 2015 the US population was over 321 million (of which 140 mil work). So how many are "institutional?"

Ray's original post stated: "The problem is half of our country is not paying. In fact, the top 10% of wage earners in this country pay close to 70% of all collected income taxes."

I understood that to mean half of all wage earners - those paying income taxes - (which is the case), not all Americans. Only about 70 million tax filers (about 21% of the total pop) pay any federal personal income tax, meaning nearly 50% of all tax filers (and 80% of all Americans) pay nothing.

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load...

...Thirdly, while the top 50% of income workers pay 97%, they don't pay all of the taxes...

But they do pay virtually all of the federal personal income tax (and that is the topic at hand).

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load.
So what would satisfy you? 96%? 106%?

...Fourthly, who should pay the bulk of the taxes if not the highest wage earners? Fifthly, the answer to your question is about 96%.

As has been repeatedly illustrated, the highest wage earners do carry the bulk of the federal personal income tax load and while we could argue the justice of increasing the burden on the top 25% to 96% of the load - an 11.2% increase - it would neither completely close the deficit nor pay down our growing debt (the interest on which will soon hamstring funding for other gov't spending).

The civilian non-institutional population is those who are neither institutionalized nor military. The figure comes from the BLS which counts 250 million civilian non-institutional people in the U.S. aged 16 and up. Heaven knows why you want to count babies and inmates among those not working; in order to make your point?

As far as that 96% figure, what I meant was that I'm ok with the top 50% paying 96% of the taxes.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The discussion, as you well know, was about those who work, file tax returns, and pay no federal personal income tax. As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax...

First, it was Ray who said half of Americans don't pay taxes. Secondly, with 100 million not working out of a civilian noninstitutional population of 250 million is 40%...

I'm not certain what you mean by "non-institutional" Americans but as of July 4th, 2015 the US population was over 321 million (of which 140 mil work). So how many are "institutional?"

Ray's original post stated: "The problem is half of our country is not paying. In fact, the top 10% of wage earners in this country pay close to 70% of all collected income taxes."

I understood that to mean half of all wage earners - those paying income taxes - (which is the case), not all Americans. Only about 70 million tax filers (about 21% of the total pop) pay any federal personal income tax, meaning nearly 50% of all tax filers (and 80% of all Americans) pay nothing.

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load...

...Thirdly, while the top 50% of income workers pay 97%, they don't pay all of the taxes...

But they do pay virtually all of the federal personal income tax (and that is the topic at hand).

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load.
So what would satisfy you? 96%? 106%?

...Fourthly, who should pay the bulk of the taxes if not the highest wage earners? Fifthly, the answer to your question is about 96%.

As has been repeatedly illustrated, the highest wage earners do carry the bulk of the federal personal income tax load and while we could argue the justice of increasing the burden on the top 25% to 96% of the load - an 11.2% increase - it would neither completely close the deficit nor pay down our growing debt (the interest on which will soon hamstring funding for other gov't spending).

The civilian non-institutional population is those who are neither institutionalized nor military. The figure comes from the BLS which counts 250 million civilian non-institutional people in the U.S. aged 16 and up. Heaven knows why you want to count babies and inmates among those not working; in order to make your point?

As far as that 96% figure, what I meant was that I'm ok with the top 50% paying 96% of the taxes.

I'm sure you are. You're not part of the top 50%. Are you okay with government buying you a new swimming pool too?????