Obama's 2011 Tax Cut Was UNFAIR to the Poor

[francoHFW]

To be honest, I am still grappling with what's the unfairness in letting people keep more of the money they earned? Can someone explain?

Apparently its only fair if the rich pay more and those who pay no taxes get the money taken from the rich.

The rich can hire Republicans to represent them in congress and give needy billionaires tax cuts when the rate they are paying is only a fraction of what someone making 40 grand is paying.

Nice to know you think that is fair.

Clearly you are not a billionaire. So why do you support getting fuked over?

So you must be a proponent of the flat tax

We already have a flat tax if you count all taxes and fees. So the rich get all the new Wealth and everyone else and the country go slowly to hell. Great job, scumbag GOP and silly chumps like you.

 

[francoHFW]

To be honest, I am still grappling with what's the unfairness in letting people keep more of the money they earned? Can someone explain?

Apparently its only fair if the rich pay more and those who pay no taxes get the money taken from the rich.

The rich can hire Republicans to represent them in congress and give needy billionaires tax cuts when the rate they are paying is only a fraction of what someone making 40 grand is paying.

Nice to know you think that is fair.

Clearly you are not a billionaire. So why do you support getting fuked over?

So you must be a proponent of the flat tax

When you go the store, everyone is paying the same rate.
Why shouldn't billionaires pay more in income taxes.
The military protects the country which protects their billions. How many billionaires are in the military? I think I could come up with many more such examples.

They would pay more with a flat tax

The one tax graph you really need to know - The Washington Post
Washington Post › wonk › 2012/09/19

Sep 19, 2012 · For most Americans, payroll and state and local taxes make up the majority of their tax bill. The federal income tax, by contrast, is our most progressive tax -- it's the tax we've designed to place the heaviest burden on the rich while bypassing the poor. ... And the federal income ...


After 35 years of the GOP cutting taxes on the rich on the Federal level-and state and local taxes and fees going up-and killing the Non Rich--we already have a flat tax a God damn GOP disaster for the non rich and the country, duped dumbasses.

 

[francoHFW]

Apparently its only fair if the rich pay more and those who pay no taxes get the money taken from the rich.

The rich can hire Republicans to represent them in congress and give needy billionaires tax cuts when the rate they are paying is only a fraction of what someone making 40 grand is paying.

Nice to know you think that is fair.

Clearly you are not a billionaire. So why do you support getting fuked over?

So you must be a proponent of the flat tax

When you go the store, everyone is paying the same rate.
Why shouldn't billionaires pay more in income taxes.
The military protects the country which protects their billions. How many billionaires are in the military? I think I could come up with many more such examples.

They would pay more with a flat tax

The one tax graph you really need to know - The Washington Post
Washington Post › wonk › 2012/09/19
View attachment 193986
Sep 19, 2012 · For most Americans, payroll and state and local taxes make up the majority of their tax bill. The federal income tax, by contrast, is our most progressive tax -- it's the tax we've designed to place the heaviest burden on the rich while bypassing the poor. ... And the federal income ...


After 35 years of the GOP cutting taxes on the rich on the Federal level-and state and local taxes and fees going up-and killing the Non Rich--we already have a flat tax a God damn GOP disaster for the non rich and the country, duped dumbasses.

And this is before the Trump giveaway to the rich...

As you can see, the poorer you are, the more state and local taxes bite into your income. As you get richer, those taxes recede, and you're mainly getting hit be federal taxes. So that's another lesson: When you omit state and local taxes from your analysis, you're omitting the taxes that hit lower-income taxpayers hardest.

 

[edthecynic]

No, the cash in your pocket is all that matters, and if on the same income you NET the same cash in your pocket at 15% as 12% then you got NO tax cut in reality no matter how big a tax cut you got on paper, because the black and white money you got on paper is not the kind of green paper money you can spend.

Why is that so hard to understand?

All money is nothing but numbers on paper.

Try to buy a gallon of milk with black and white numbers on paper and see what happens.

I do it all the time

At some point you will have to pony up the actual greenbacks to cover the plastic, and they won't accept a tax cut that exists ONLY on paper.

No I pay the card via bank draft which is nothing but ones and zeros.

And what do you pay for the bank draft with?

 

[edthecynic]

One, not it does not, Mike, and you know it.

Two, yes, everyone pays the payroll tax. And, yes, it was the GOP who forced it through.

Three, your comments are confused. Try again.

Not everyone pays payroll taxes

That's Right, only wage earners pay payroll taxes, Capital Gains Tycoons don't.

 

[BluesLegend]

To be honest, I am still grappling with what's the unfairness in letting people keep more of the money they earned? Can someone explain?

Apparently its only fair if the rich pay more and those who pay no taxes get the money taken from the rich.

The rich can hire Republicans to represent them in congress and give needy billionaires tax cuts when the rate they are paying is only a fraction of what someone making 40 grand is paying.

Nice to know you think that is fair.

Clearly you are not a billionaire. So why do you support getting fuked over?

So you must be a proponent of the flat tax

We already have a flat tax if you count all taxes and fees. So the rich get all the new Wealth and everyone else and the country go slowly to hell. Great job, scumbag GOP and silly chumps like you.

The 'rich' already pay the lions share of the taxes, get a job pay your fair share lib.

 

[BluesLegend]

The rich can hire Republicans to represent them in congress and give needy billionaires tax cuts when the rate they are paying is only a fraction of what someone making 40 grand is paying.

Nice to know you think that is fair.

Clearly you are not a billionaire. So why do you support getting fuked over?

So you must be a proponent of the flat tax

When you go the store, everyone is paying the same rate.
Why shouldn't billionaires pay more in income taxes.
The military protects the country which protects their billions. How many billionaires are in the military? I think I could come up with many more such examples.

They would pay more with a flat tax

The one tax graph you really need to know - The Washington Post
Washington Post › wonk › 2012/09/19
View attachment 193986
Sep 19, 2012 · For most Americans, payroll and state and local taxes make up the majority of their tax bill. The federal income tax, by contrast, is our most progressive tax -- it's the tax we've designed to place the heaviest burden on the rich while bypassing the poor. ... And the federal income ...


After 35 years of the GOP cutting taxes on the rich on the Federal level-and state and local taxes and fees going up-and killing the Non Rich--we already have a flat tax a God damn GOP disaster for the non rich and the country, duped dumbasses.

And this is before the Trump giveaway to the rich...

As you can see, the poorer you are, the more state and local taxes bite into your income. As you get richer, those taxes recede, and you're mainly getting hit be federal taxes. So that's another lesson: When you omit state and local taxes from your analysis, you're omitting the taxes that hit lower-income taxpayers hardest.

Its not the 'rich' fault that states especially Dem run states tax the crap out of the poor and middle class.

 

[Flash]

Since judging tax cuts by their gross dollar amounts is the liberal approach to judging all tax cuts signed by conservative presidents, let us apply that same approach to Obama's 2011 payroll tax cut--so we can see how misleading it is. Using that approach, we can say that most of Obama's tax cut did not go to low-income people but to the well-off and affluent! Ha! Let's see:

Obama's 2011 payroll tax cut reduced the payroll tax by 2 percentage points, from 6.2% to 4.2%. Let us examine who saved the most money per year:

Joe A who earned $20K per year saved $400.
Joe B who earned $50K per year saved $1,000, 250% more than Joe A!
Joe C who earned $100K per year saved $2,000, 500% more than Joe A!
Joe D who earned $150K per year saved $3,000, 750% more than Joe A!
Joe E who earned $200K per year saved $4,000, 1,000% more than Joe A!

Obama's 2011 tax cuts ended in 2013. Let's see who saved how much over the course of those three years:

Joe A saved $1,200.
Joe B saved $3,000.
Joe C saved $6,000.
Joe D saved $9,000
Joe E saved $12,000.

The money saved by those five people added up to $31,200, and $27,000 of it went to Joe C, Joe D, and Joe E. In other words, 86% of Obama's tax cut went to people who made over $100K per year, and only 14% of it went Joe A and Joe B. Totally unfair!

Clearly, Obama's tax cut was heavily weighted to the well-off and the affluent, not to the poor and low-income folks!

You see how silly, dishonest, and misleading this comparison is? This is what liberals are now doing with the Trump tax cuts. This is how they come up with the claim that 82%/85%/90% of the Trump tax cuts are going "to the rich."

These stupid hateful Moon Bats play that class warfare card when it suits them but ignore it when they do the same thing.

Kinda like wars. They bitch about Republican wars and say nothing about Democrat wars.

 

[francoHFW]

To be honest, I am still grappling with what's the unfairness in letting people keep more of the money they earned? Can someone explain?

Apparently its only fair if the rich pay more and those who pay no taxes get the money taken from the rich.

The rich can hire Republicans to represent them in congress and give needy billionaires tax cuts when the rate they are paying is only a fraction of what someone making 40 grand is paying.

Nice to know you think that is fair.

Clearly you are not a billionaire. So why do you support getting fuked over?

So you must be a proponent of the flat tax

We already have a flat tax if you count all taxes and fees. So the rich get all the new Wealth and everyone else and the country go slowly to hell. Great job, scumbag GOP and silly chumps like you.

The 'rich' already pay the lions share of the taxes, get a job pay your fair share lib.

I am happily retired thank you, brainwashed functional a******. They also make that same percentage in income and get all the new wealth. While everyone else and the country go to hell, super duper.

 

[BluesLegend]

Apparently its only fair if the rich pay more and those who pay no taxes get the money taken from the rich.

The rich can hire Republicans to represent them in congress and give needy billionaires tax cuts when the rate they are paying is only a fraction of what someone making 40 grand is paying.

Nice to know you think that is fair.

Clearly you are not a billionaire. So why do you support getting fuked over?

So you must be a proponent of the flat tax

We already have a flat tax if you count all taxes and fees. So the rich get all the new Wealth and everyone else and the country go slowly to hell. Great job, scumbag GOP and silly chumps like you.

The 'rich' already pay the lions share of the taxes, get a job pay your fair share lib.

I am happily retired thank you, brainwashed functional a******. They also make that same percentage in income and get all the new wealth. While everyone else and the country go to hell, super duper.

They get all the new wealth? lmao Okay franco

 

[francoHFW]

So you must be a proponent of the flat tax

When you go the store, everyone is paying the same rate.
Why shouldn't billionaires pay more in income taxes.
The military protects the country which protects their billions. How many billionaires are in the military? I think I could come up with many more such examples.

They would pay more with a flat tax

The one tax graph you really need to know - The Washington Post
Washington Post › wonk › 2012/09/19
View attachment 193986
Sep 19, 2012 · For most Americans, payroll and state and local taxes make up the majority of their tax bill. The federal income tax, by contrast, is our most progressive tax -- it's the tax we've designed to place the heaviest burden on the rich while bypassing the poor. ... And the federal income ...


After 35 years of the GOP cutting taxes on the rich on the Federal level-and state and local taxes and fees going up-and killing the Non Rich--we already have a flat tax a God damn GOP disaster for the non rich and the country, duped dumbasses.

And this is before the Trump giveaway to the rich...

As you can see, the poorer you are, the more state and local taxes bite into your income. As you get richer, those taxes recede, and you're mainly getting hit be federal taxes. So that's another lesson: When you omit state and local taxes from your analysis, you're omitting the taxes that hit lower-income taxpayers hardest.

Its not the 'rich' fault that states especially Dem run states tax the crap out of the poor and middle class.

They cut federal taxes, take all that credit, while states and localities and non Rich and our infrastructure are left in the lurch, dumbass. We have spent 50% less on infrastructure since Reagan. Open your eyes.

 

[francoHFW]

The rich can hire Republicans to represent them in congress and give needy billionaires tax cuts when the rate they are paying is only a fraction of what someone making 40 grand is paying.

Nice to know you think that is fair.

Clearly you are not a billionaire. So why do you support getting fuked over?

So you must be a proponent of the flat tax

We already have a flat tax if you count all taxes and fees. So the rich get all the new Wealth and everyone else and the country go slowly to hell. Great job, scumbag GOP and silly chumps like you.

The 'rich' already pay the lions share of the taxes, get a job pay your fair share lib.

I am happily retired thank you, brainwashed functional a******. They also make that same percentage in income and get all the new wealth. While everyone else and the country go to hell, super duper.

They get all the new wealth? lmao Okay franco

And you are a interested Republican LOL!
Vast majority of new wealth last year went to top 1% - USA Today
USA Today › story › 2018/01/22

 

[BluesLegend]

When you go the store, everyone is paying the same rate.
Why shouldn't billionaires pay more in income taxes.
The military protects the country which protects their billions. How many billionaires are in the military? I think I could come up with many more such examples.

They would pay more with a flat tax

The one tax graph you really need to know - The Washington Post
Washington Post › wonk › 2012/09/19
View attachment 193986
Sep 19, 2012 · For most Americans, payroll and state and local taxes make up the majority of their tax bill. The federal income tax, by contrast, is our most progressive tax -- it's the tax we've designed to place the heaviest burden on the rich while bypassing the poor. ... And the federal income ...


After 35 years of the GOP cutting taxes on the rich on the Federal level-and state and local taxes and fees going up-and killing the Non Rich--we already have a flat tax a God damn GOP disaster for the non rich and the country, duped dumbasses.

And this is before the Trump giveaway to the rich...

As you can see, the poorer you are, the more state and local taxes bite into your income. As you get richer, those taxes recede, and you're mainly getting hit be federal taxes. So that's another lesson: When you omit state and local taxes from your analysis, you're omitting the taxes that hit lower-income taxpayers hardest.

Its not the 'rich' fault that states especially Dem run states tax the crap out of the poor and middle class.

They cut federal taxes, take all that credit, while states and localities and non Rich and our infrastructure are left in the lurch, dumbass. We have spent 50% less on infrastructure since Reagan. Open your eyes.

How much money do you want to steal from the rich? Who gets the money you want to steal?

 

[francoHFW]

They would pay more with a flat tax

The one tax graph you really need to know - The Washington Post
Washington Post › wonk › 2012/09/19
View attachment 193986
Sep 19, 2012 · For most Americans, payroll and state and local taxes make up the majority of their tax bill. The federal income tax, by contrast, is our most progressive tax -- it's the tax we've designed to place the heaviest burden on the rich while bypassing the poor. ... And the federal income ...


After 35 years of the GOP cutting taxes on the rich on the Federal level-and state and local taxes and fees going up-and killing the Non Rich--we already have a flat tax a God damn GOP disaster for the non rich and the country, duped dumbasses.

And this is before the Trump giveaway to the rich...

As you can see, the poorer you are, the more state and local taxes bite into your income. As you get richer, those taxes recede, and you're mainly getting hit be federal taxes. So that's another lesson: When you omit state and local taxes from your analysis, you're omitting the taxes that hit lower-income taxpayers hardest.

Its not the 'rich' fault that states especially Dem run states tax the crap out of the poor and middle class.

They cut federal taxes, take all that credit, while states and localities and non Rich and our infrastructure are left in the lurch, dumbass. We have spent 50% less on infrastructure since Reagan. Open your eyes.

How much money do you want to steal from the rich? Who gets the money you want to steal?

They have Been stealing from you 4 35 years, dingbat.
Vast majority of new wealth last year went to top 1% - USA Today
USA Today › story › 2018/01/22
Jan 21, 2018 · A new billionaire is created every other day. The three richest Americans have the same amount of wealth ...

I would say go back to Reagan's top rate of 50% it 1982. Perhaps a 60% rate over 10 million. Put it into infrastructure and cheap training and education and tax cut 4 the non rich. Just like Democrats want d u h Dupe.

 

[francoHFW]

The one tax graph you really need to know - The Washington Post
Washington Post › wonk › 2012/09/19
View attachment 193986
Sep 19, 2012 · For most Americans, payroll and state and local taxes make up the majority of their tax bill. The federal income tax, by contrast, is our most progressive tax -- it's the tax we've designed to place the heaviest burden on the rich while bypassing the poor. ... And the federal income ...


After 35 years of the GOP cutting taxes on the rich on the Federal level-and state and local taxes and fees going up-and killing the Non Rich--we already have a flat tax a God damn GOP disaster for the non rich and the country, duped dumbasses.

And this is before the Trump giveaway to the rich...

As you can see, the poorer you are, the more state and local taxes bite into your income. As you get richer, those taxes recede, and you're mainly getting hit be federal taxes. So that's another lesson: When you omit state and local taxes from your analysis, you're omitting the taxes that hit lower-income taxpayers hardest.

Its not the 'rich' fault that states especially Dem run states tax the crap out of the poor and middle class.

They cut federal taxes, take all that credit, while states and localities and non Rich and our infrastructure are left in the lurch, dumbass. We have spent 50% less on infrastructure since Reagan. Open your eyes.

How much money do you want to steal from the rich? Who gets the money you want to steal?

They have Been stealing from you 4 35 years, dingbat.
Vast majority of new wealth last year went to top 1% - USA Today
USA Today › story › 2018/01/22
Jan 21, 2018 · A new billionaire is created every other day. The three richest Americans have the same amount of wealth ...

I would say go back to Reagan's top rate of 50% it 1982. Perhaps a 60% rate over 10 million. Put it into infrastructure and cheap training and education and tax cut 4 the non rich. Just like Democrats want d u h Dupe.

In Numbers.

Over the past 35 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/blog/09/04/27/CongratulationstoEmmanuelSaez/
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp?SelectedTable=58&Freq=Qtr&FirstYear


And it just keeps getting worse...

 

[BluesLegend]

And this is before the Trump giveaway to the rich...

As you can see, the poorer you are, the more state and local taxes bite into your income. As you get richer, those taxes recede, and you're mainly getting hit be federal taxes. So that's another lesson: When you omit state and local taxes from your analysis, you're omitting the taxes that hit lower-income taxpayers hardest.

Its not the 'rich' fault that states especially Dem run states tax the crap out of the poor and middle class.

They cut federal taxes, take all that credit, while states and localities and non Rich and our infrastructure are left in the lurch, dumbass. We have spent 50% less on infrastructure since Reagan. Open your eyes.

How much money do you want to steal from the rich? Who gets the money you want to steal?

They have Been stealing from you 4 35 years, dingbat.
Vast majority of new wealth last year went to top 1% - USA Today
USA Today › story › 2018/01/22
Jan 21, 2018 · A new billionaire is created every other day. The three richest Americans have the same amount of wealth ...

I would say go back to Reagan's top rate of 50% it 1982. Perhaps a 60% rate over 10 million. Put it into infrastructure and cheap training and education and tax cut 4 the non rich. Just like Democrats want d u h Dupe.

In Numbers.

Over the past 35 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/blog/09/04/27/CongratulationstoEmmanuelSaez/
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp?SelectedTable=58&Freq=Qtr&FirstYear


And it just keeps getting worse...

Dem jobs killing policies, regulations, and sky high taxes are not at fault? Poor franco come here,

 

[francoHFW]

Its not the 'rich' fault that states especially Dem run states tax the crap out of the poor and middle class.

They cut federal taxes, take all that credit, while states and localities and non Rich and our infrastructure are left in the lurch, dumbass. We have spent 50% less on infrastructure since Reagan. Open your eyes.

How much money do you want to steal from the rich? Who gets the money you want to steal?

They have Been stealing from you 4 35 years, dingbat.
Vast majority of new wealth last year went to top 1% - USA Today
USA Today › story › 2018/01/22
Jan 21, 2018 · A new billionaire is created every other day. The three richest Americans have the same amount of wealth ...

I would say go back to Reagan's top rate of 50% it 1982. Perhaps a 60% rate over 10 million. Put it into infrastructure and cheap training and education and tax cut 4 the non rich. Just like Democrats want d u h Dupe.

In Numbers.

Over the past 35 years the American dream has gradually disappeared. The process was slow, so most people didn’t notice. They just worked a few more hours, borrowed a little more and cut back on non-essentials. But looking at the numbers and comparing them over long time periods, it is obvious that things have changed drastically. Here are the details:

1. WORKERS PRODUCE MORE BUT THE GAINS GO TO BUSINESS.

Over the past 63 years worker productivity has grown by 2.0% per year.

But after 1980, workers received a smaller share every year. Labor’s share of income (1992 = 100%):

1950 = 101%
1960 = 105%
1970 = 105%
1980 = 105% – Reagan
1990 = 100%
2000 = 96%
2007 = 92%

A 13% drop since 1980

2. THE TOP 10% GET A LARGER SHARE.

Share of National Income going to Top 10%:

1950 = 35%
1960 = 34%
1970 = 34%
1980 = 34% – Reagan
1990 = 40%
2000 = 47%
2007 = 50%

An increase of 16% since Reagan.

3. WORKERS COMPENSATED FOR THE LOSS OF INCOME BY SPENDING THEIR SAVINGS.

The savings Rose up to Reagan and fell during and after.

1950 = 6.0%
1960 = 7.0%
1970 = 8.5%
1980 = 10.0% – Reagan
1982 = 11.2% – Peak
1990 = 7.0%
2000 = 2.0%
2006 = -1.1% (Negative = withdrawing from savings)

A 12.3% drop after Reagan.

4. WORKERS ALSO BORROWED TO MAKE UP FOR THE LOSS.

Household Debt as percentage of GDP:

1965 = 46%
1970 = 45%
1980 = 50% – Reagan
1990 = 61%
2000 = 69%
2007 = 95%

A 45% increase after 1980.

5. SO THE GAP BETWEEN THE RICHEST AND THE POOREST HAS GROWN.

Gap Between the Share of Capital Income earned by the top 1%
and the bottom 80%:

1980 = 10%
2003 = 56%

A 5.6 times increase.

6. AND THE AMERICAN DREAM IS GONE.

The Probably of Moving Up from the Bottom 40% to the Top 40%:

1945 = 12%
1958 = 6%
1990 = 3%
2000 = 2%

A 10% Decrease.

Links:

1 = ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/pf/totalf1.txt
1 = https://www.clevelandfed.org/Research/PolicyDis/No7Nov04.pdf
1 = Clipboard01.jpg (image)
2 – http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/blog/09/04/27/CongratulationstoEmmanuelSaez/
3 = http://www.demos.org/inequality/images/charts/uspersonalsaving_thumb.gif
3 = http://www.bea.gov/national/nipaweb/TableView.asp?SelectedTable=58&Freq=Qtr&FirstYear


And it just keeps getting worse...

Dem jobs killing policies, regulations, and sky high taxes are not at fault? Poor franco come here,

Nothing is is thicker than GOP skull.... Like under Reagan and the bushes? LOL!

 

[Skull Pilot]

All money is nothing but numbers on paper.

Try to buy a gallon of milk with black and white numbers on paper and see what happens.

I do it all the time

At some point you will have to pony up the actual greenbacks to cover the plastic, and they won't accept a tax cut that exists ONLY on paper.

No I pay the card via bank draft which is nothing but ones and zeros.

And what do you pay for the bank draft with?

My paycheck gets electronically deposited

I haven't used paper money in years

It's all just ones and zeros

 

[Skull Pilot]

To be honest, I am still grappling with what's the unfairness in letting people keep more of the money they earned? Can someone explain?

Apparently its only fair if the rich pay more and those who pay no taxes get the money taken from the rich.

The rich can hire Republicans to represent them in congress and give needy billionaires tax cuts when the rate they are paying is only a fraction of what someone making 40 grand is paying.

Nice to know you think that is fair.

Clearly you are not a billionaire. So why do you support getting fuked over?

So you must be a proponent of the flat tax

We already have a flat tax if you count all taxes and fees. So the rich get all the new Wealth and everyone else and the country go slowly to hell. Great job, scumbag GOP and silly chumps like you.

Since the thread is about the changes in the income tax your post is irrelevant as usual

 

[mikegriffith1]

Ok, so let me see if I have this straight: The Trump tax cuts are unfair and favor the rich because the rate cuts do not help people who already have an effective top marginal rate of 0%--that is, people who do not have to pay any federal income taxes after all is said and done, since they either get back all the federal income taxes they pay, or they get back more than they pay! "Unfair"?!

Liberals want us to ignore the fact that under the Trump tax cuts, the rich pay a top marginal rate of 37% and have lost tens of thousands of dollars in state and local tax deductions because those deductions have now been capped at $10K.

Finally, one simple, self-evident, irrefutable fact remains: Using gross dollar amounts to judge any tax cut is erroneous and misleading. Yet, that is exactly the approach that liberals are using when they claim that "80%/82%/85%/90%" of the tax cuts are going to the rich.