What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Moderate Dems duck, cover on tax hikes

auditor0007

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
12,566
Reaction score
2,265
Points
255
Location
Toledo, OH
Moderate Dems duck, cover on tax hikes - Scott Wong and Jake Sherman - POLITICO.com

Those in the top 1% of wage earners now pay 38% of income taxes. The top 5% pay 59% of income taxes. What should their fair share be?

-

Those numbers change dramatically when you include all forms of taxation.

Taxes and the rich: How much do they pay now? - CSMonitor.com

While it is true that the very wealthy pay much more in federal income tax, the fact is that they pay much less than everyone else in payroll taxes and in all but a couple of states, their state and local tax rates are much lower than that of even the lowest income earners.

Considering that I generally support a somewhat progressive tax structure, the wealthy are underpaying. That doesn't mean we should soak them, but they need to pay more.
 

Quantum Windbag

Gold Member
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
58,308
Reaction score
5,093
Points
245
Moderate Dems duck, cover on tax hikes - Scott Wong and Jake Sherman - POLITICO.com

Those in the top 1% of wage earners now pay 38% of income taxes. The top 5% pay 59% of income taxes. What should their fair share be?

-

Those numbers change dramatically when you include all forms of taxation.

Taxes and the rich: How much do they pay now? - CSMonitor.com

While it is true that the very wealthy pay much more in federal income tax, the fact is that they pay much less than everyone else in payroll taxes and in all but a couple of states, their state and local tax rates are much lower than that of even the lowest income earners.

Considering that I generally support a somewhat progressive tax structure, the wealthy are underpaying. That doesn't mean we should soak them, but they need to pay more.

Bullshit.

Most states have a progressive income tax, and the rate for rick earners is higher than low income earners across the board.
 

auditor0007

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
12,566
Reaction score
2,265
Points
255
Location
Toledo, OH
Moderate Dems duck, cover on tax hikes - Scott Wong and Jake Sherman - POLITICO.com

Those in the top 1% of wage earners now pay 38% of income taxes. The top 5% pay 59% of income taxes. What should their fair share be?

-

Those numbers change dramatically when you include all forms of taxation.

Taxes and the rich: How much do they pay now? - CSMonitor.com

While it is true that the very wealthy pay much more in federal income tax, the fact is that they pay much less than everyone else in payroll taxes and in all but a couple of states, their state and local tax rates are much lower than that of even the lowest income earners.

Considering that I generally support a somewhat progressive tax structure, the wealthy are underpaying. That doesn't mean we should soak them, but they need to pay more.

Bullshit.

Most states have a progressive income tax, and the rate for rick earners is higher than low income earners across the board.

Income taxes are not where states collect the majority of their revenue. Do some research before you stick your foot in your mouth. Damn.

Study Identifies Most Regressive State Tax Systems

You can find plenty of other sources to back this up. It only requires a search on Google or your favorite search engine. Texas is one of the worst states of all. And Perry wants to bring his tax ideas to Washington? No thank you.
 
OP
get_involved

get_involved

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
2,046
Reaction score
430
Points
130
Moderate Dems duck, cover on tax hikes - Scott Wong and Jake Sherman - POLITICO.com

Those in the top 1% of wage earners now pay 38% of income taxes. The top 5% pay 59% of income taxes. What should their fair share be?

-

Those numbers change dramatically when you include all forms of taxation.

Taxes and the rich: How much do they pay now? - CSMonitor.com

While it is true that the very wealthy pay much more in federal income tax, the fact is that they pay much less than everyone else in payroll taxes and in all but a couple of states, their state and local tax rates are much lower than that of even the lowest income earners.

Considering that I generally support a somewhat progressive tax structure, the wealthy are underpaying. That doesn't mean we should soak them, but they need to pay more.

How much more?
 

auditor0007

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
12,566
Reaction score
2,265
Points
255
Location
Toledo, OH
Moderate Dems duck, cover on tax hikes - Scott Wong and Jake Sherman - POLITICO.com

Those in the top 1% of wage earners now pay 38% of income taxes. The top 5% pay 59% of income taxes. What should their fair share be?

-

Those numbers change dramatically when you include all forms of taxation.

Taxes and the rich: How much do they pay now? - CSMonitor.com

While it is true that the very wealthy pay much more in federal income tax, the fact is that they pay much less than everyone else in payroll taxes and in all but a couple of states, their state and local tax rates are much lower than that of even the lowest income earners.

Considering that I generally support a somewhat progressive tax structure, the wealthy are underpaying. That doesn't mean we should soak them, but they need to pay more.

How much more?

Whatever it takes to get us back to at least having close to a balanced budget. I also want to see the Bush tax cuts expire, so everyone sees a tax increase. Capital gains should be raised back to 28%. I'd be happy with 25%. Don't get me wrong, we need to make spending cuts too. It's not all a revenue problem, but it certainly is not all a spending problem. Revenues are at their lowest rates since 1950, and it's not just by a little, it's by 4% of GDP.
 

Charles_Main

AR15 Owner
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
16,692
Reaction score
2,248
Points
88
Location
Michigan, USA
Obama is losing a lot of support From Democrats, because of his Plan to Remove the Charitable Donation Deduction. Rightly so, it's a terrible Idea that will Seriously decrease the Amount of Money vital Charities that server the poor take in every year.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
140,627
Reaction score
31,043
Points
2,180
Those numbers change dramatically when you include all forms of taxation.

Taxes and the rich: How much do they pay now? - CSMonitor.com

While it is true that the very wealthy pay much more in federal income tax, the fact is that they pay much less than everyone else in payroll taxes and in all but a couple of states, their state and local tax rates are much lower than that of even the lowest income earners.

Considering that I generally support a somewhat progressive tax structure, the wealthy are underpaying. That doesn't mean we should soak them, but they need to pay more.

The fact is the wealthy in this country pay more than in any other industrialized country. The rich pay more than their "fair share," a nebulous term that libtards always decline to define.

The bottom line is that the last this this country needs is higher taxes.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
140,627
Reaction score
31,043
Points
2,180
Those numbers change dramatically when you include all forms of taxation.

Taxes and the rich: How much do they pay now? - CSMonitor.com

While it is true that the very wealthy pay much more in federal income tax, the fact is that they pay much less than everyone else in payroll taxes and in all but a couple of states, their state and local tax rates are much lower than that of even the lowest income earners.

Considering that I generally support a somewhat progressive tax structure, the wealthy are underpaying. That doesn't mean we should soak them, but they need to pay more.

How much more?

Whatever it takes to get us back to at least having close to a balanced budget. I also want to see the Bush tax cuts expire, so everyone sees a tax increase. Capital gains should be raised back to 28%. I'd be happy with 25%. Don't get me wrong, we need to make spending cuts too. It's not all a revenue problem, but it certainly is not all a spending problem. Revenues are at their lowest rates since 1950, and it's not just by a little, it's by 4% of GDP.


Only a lunatic or a tic on the ass of society wants his taxes increased. There simply isn't enough money to eliminate the deficit with tax increases. It's time for the useless tics to get out of the wagon and start help pulling the wagon.
 

editec

Mr. Forgot-it-All
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
41,421
Reaction score
5,662
Points
48
Location
Maine
Those numbers change dramatically when you include all forms of taxation.

Taxes and the rich: How much do they pay now? - CSMonitor.com

While it is true that the very wealthy pay much more in federal income tax, the fact is that they pay much less than everyone else in payroll taxes and in all but a couple of states, their state and local tax rates are much lower than that of even the lowest income earners.

Considering that I generally support a somewhat progressive tax structure, the wealthy are underpaying. That doesn't mean we should soak them, but they need to pay more.

The fact is the wealthy in this country pay more than in any other industrialized country.

Wrong.
 

Quantum Windbag

Gold Member
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
58,308
Reaction score
5,093
Points
245
Those numbers change dramatically when you include all forms of taxation.

Taxes and the rich: How much do they pay now? - CSMonitor.com

While it is true that the very wealthy pay much more in federal income tax, the fact is that they pay much less than everyone else in payroll taxes and in all but a couple of states, their state and local tax rates are much lower than that of even the lowest income earners.

Considering that I generally support a somewhat progressive tax structure, the wealthy are underpaying. That doesn't mean we should soak them, but they need to pay more.

Bullshit.

Most states have a progressive income tax, and the rate for rick earners is higher than low income earners across the board.

Income taxes are not where states collect the majority of their revenue. Do some research before you stick your foot in your mouth. Damn.

Study Identifies Most Regressive State Tax Systems

You can find plenty of other sources to back this up. It only requires a search on Google or your favorite search engine. Texas is one of the worst states of all. And Perry wants to bring his tax ideas to Washington? No thank you.

I never said it was. It does not change the fact that your claim is bullshit, because rich people generally pay higher property taxes and buy more cars.

FYI, Income taxes are not where the federal government collects most of its revenue either.
 

Quantum Windbag

Gold Member
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
58,308
Reaction score
5,093
Points
245
Those numbers change dramatically when you include all forms of taxation.

Taxes and the rich: How much do they pay now? - CSMonitor.com

While it is true that the very wealthy pay much more in federal income tax, the fact is that they pay much less than everyone else in payroll taxes and in all but a couple of states, their state and local tax rates are much lower than that of even the lowest income earners.

Considering that I generally support a somewhat progressive tax structure, the wealthy are underpaying. That doesn't mean we should soak them, but they need to pay more.

How much more?

Whatever it takes to get us back to at least having close to a balanced budget. I also want to see the Bush tax cuts expire, so everyone sees a tax increase. Capital gains should be raised back to 28%. I'd be happy with 25%. Don't get me wrong, we need to make spending cuts too. It's not all a revenue problem, but it certainly is not all a spending problem. Revenues are at their lowest rates since 1950, and it's not just by a little, it's by 4% of GDP.

That would take taxing everyone who earns income at about 1000%. Care to explain how concentrating on the wealthy, however you define that, will help?
 

waltky

Wise ol' monkey
Joined
Feb 6, 2011
Messages
26,211
Reaction score
2,584
Points
275
Location
Okolona, KY
Granny been sayin' all along, dem rich folks can afford to pay their fair share o' taxes...
:tongue:
Richest Americans' net worth up 12 percent to $1.5 trillion, Forbes 400 list says
Wednesday, September 21, 2011, Social networking entrepreneurs moved their way onto or up the ranks of America’s 400 richest citizens this year, with six billionaires alone on the list who are tied to the fortunes of Facebook.
The site’s founder, Mark Zuckerberg broke into the top 20 at No. 14 and his net worth rose the most at $10.6 billion to $17.5 billion, according to Forbes’ annual rankings, released yesterday. Facebook’s co-founder Dustin Moskovitz — and Zuckerberg’s former roommate — is the youngest billionaire at age 27, with $3.5 billion. Three other social media tycoons debuted on the list, including LinkedIn’s Reid Hoffman ($1.5 billion), Groupon’s Eric Lefkofsky ($1.5 billion) and Zynga’s Mark Pincus ($2 billion).

Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page are tied at No. 15 with a worth of $16.7 billion each. Overall, the combined wealth of the 400 wealthiest people in America rose 12 percent to $1.5 trillion, with an average net worth of $3.8 billion, according to Forbes. In 2010, the combined worth was $1.37 trillion. The figure is still shy of the $1.57 trillion total from 2008. Microsoft founder Bill Gates is at the top of the list for the 18th year in a row, with $59 billion, an increase of $5 billion from last year. Warren Buffet — who recently called for an increase on taxes for the rich — ranked second with $39 billion, but had the biggest loss of anyone at $6 billion in 2010. Hedge fund manager George Soros joined the top 10 for the first time, with $22 billion.

New Jersey’s richest residents kept their perch in the top 300 and are worth an estimated $16.5 billion together. The state’s richest citizen is Donald Newhouse, co-owner of Advance Publications, the parent company of The Star-Ledger, whose wealth grew to $5.9 billion, up $500 million from last year. Hedge fund managers David Tepper and Leon Cooperman and investors Peter Kellogg, controlling shareholder of IAT Reinvestment, and Michael Price, manager of the private firm MFP Investors, ranked between No. 60 and No. 293. Their wealth ranges from $1.5 billion to $5 billion. Other highlights of the report, published at The Richest People in America - Forbes, include:

The cost of admission to the list rose to $1.05 billion, up from $1 billion in 2010.

There were 18 newcomers to the list and 24 dropouts.

Net worth increased for 262 members, and decreased for 72 people.

California had the highest number of members with 88, followed by New York with 64 and Texas with 47.

Source
 
Last edited:

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$260.01
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top