US budget deficit totals $76.9 billion in July

[Care4all]

Aint' shifted a DAMN thing "from corporate to wage earners". The only wage earners paying ANY INCOME TAX AT ALL are making $100,000 or more. 1/2 of the wage earners now pay ZERO...

They pay payroll taxes, whose revenues are almost equal to income tax revenues and almost 5 times as much as corporate revenues.

That's because FICA is expensive. Those are UNIVERSAL programs. The proceeds are ONLY SUPPOSED to go for THEIR future benefit. I'm not impressed. Half of the folks in the pile pay ZERO to OPERATE the Federal govt. You cannot "load them" by cutting taxes elsewhere.

but the government has used about $3 TRILLION of social Security surplus funds to pay for expenditures that federal income taxes should have paid for....and now they are threatening and have reduced Social Security benefits because they can't afford to pay them back for what they used....

Also, since the beginning of taxes in this Nation, the poorest and poor overall, have not been taxed to pay for federal expenditures.... this is nothing new....

you simply can't get blood out of a turnip... it is inhumane to take from the poor, and has always been recognized as such....

since early Biblical times..... the poorest were never tithed, they received the tithe.

 

[flacaltenn]

Aint' shifted a DAMN thing "from corporate to wage earners". The only wage earners paying ANY INCOME TAX AT ALL are making $100,000 or more. 1/2 of the wage earners now pay ZERO...

They pay payroll taxes, whose revenues are almost equal to income tax revenues and almost 5 times as much as corporate revenues.

That's because FICA is expensive. Those are UNIVERSAL programs. The proceeds are ONLY SUPPOSED to go for THEIR future benefit. I'm not impressed. Half of the folks in the pile pay ZERO to OPERATE the Federal govt. You cannot "load them" by cutting taxes elsewhere.

Yep, name another country where only half the working population pays national taxes. Or one where the bottom 1/3 have a NEGATIVE tax rate!

In fact we've probably gone too far. Because every little bit helps and everyone should have a token buy-in into paying for the Monster Minion of Morons that they want as a government.

 

[Care4all]

Even when income taxes began, the Standard deduction was equivalent to $68,000 in today's dollar.... so those making up to $68,000 were exempt from federal income taxing.

 

[Care4all]

You can only be income taxed on what is equivalent to your PROFIT, just like businesses are taxed on their profit, and not their gross revenues.

Thus the Standard Deduction, which exempts you from paying taxes on what it supposedly takes to survive, (your business expenses of sorts, are taken away from taxable income, so to say) and only taxed on what is above it....

 

[flacaltenn]

but the government has used about $3 TRILLION of social Security surplus funds to pay for expenditures that federal income taxes should have paid for....and now they are threatening and have reduced Social Security benefits because they can't afford to pay them back for what they used....

No SSec threats or reductions have occurred. In FACT, the only reductions are the Tax laws pertaining to counting SocSec income that were passed under Clinton. Which did hurt even Middle Class taxpayers.

We're gonna have to navigate some really treacherous routes to SURVIVE the unconscionable NEGLECT and THEFT that Congress pushed on us. It will peak out in about 8 or 10 years. NOW is the time to reduce the size of the Federal Govt. There's PLENTY of integration, merging, and efficiency that COULD be done.

Also, since the beginning of taxes in this Nation, the poorest and poor overall, have not been taxed to pay for federal expenditures.... this is nothing new....

That's not true at all. I've been watching the Zero payment line go UP and include MORE AND MORE of the working class being exempt from income tax all my life. I remember when it was just 25% of working filers paid no taxes. I was taxed on my 1st part time college job in the very early 80s. Add to that the NEW distorted concept of EITC that allows working poor refunds of Tax credits although they had ZERO tax liability. IN THEORY -- that could be an efficient alternative to the myriad of patchwork welfare handouts that exist. But in practice, we get nothing in return in terms of phasing out ANY existing element of the welfare establishment.

 

[flacaltenn]

Even tho the Demo party is gonna ASSERT that they will cut taxes for the middle class, and peg their whole tax policy on this misconception -- there is no ROOM for cutting ANYONE'S federal taxes unless they are already making close or above $100,000 net. Only room left is for "more crumbs" like dependent credits and self-employed business expenses. Can't issue Credits to people who have NO tax bill.

You want to HELP the lower levels of the Middle Class? Fix the issue with them paying the ENTIRE 12.6% of FICA tax. They HAVE no employer to pay half of that. Let them opt out of PART of "employer 1/2" in exchange for REDUCED future SSec benefits. Another Libertarian concept. Two birds with one law.

 

[Care4all]

No SSec threats or reductions have occurred. In FACT, the only reductions are the Tax laws pertaining to counting SocSec income that were passed under Clinton. Which did hurt even Middle Class taxpayers.

We're gonna have to navigate some really treacherous routes to SURVIVE the unconscionable NEGLECT and THEFT that Congress pushed on us. It will peak out in about 8 or 10 years. NOW is the time to reduce the size of the Federal Govt. There's PLENTY of integration, merging, and efficiency that COULD be done.

Agree that they could tighten up their spending, but we are adding walls, and creating new Space force and having Military parades scheduled etc and using private jets for gvt workers to travel and $35,000 dining sets for decorating offices, that truly do not show any kind of tightening up their spending....

there have been changes to Social Security, as example....I expected to be able to draw on Matt's social security if I ever reach 62, then when I would turn 66 1/2, I would draw on my earned social security.... they got rid of that....if you worked yourself, you can not draw on your husband's and then draw on your own by dropping your 1/2 of your husband's when you become of full age payment..... this IS HOW IT WAS DONE..... now you can not.... that is a CUT for people like me..... even though I admit, it was a loophole that would( help people like me....

(My mother never worked other than the year my father was in Viet Nam, but she at 62, could draw 1/2 of my father's social security....)

the other thing that I thought they had changed, was from the Obama era, but it looks like it may have never gone through, even though it was in Obama's budget which was to change the COLA to a chained CPI....

explained here: https://money.usnews.com/money/reti...-chained-cpi-affects-social-security-payments

 

[Care4all]

That's not true at all. I've been watching the Zero payment line go UP and include MORE AND MORE of the working class being exempt from income tax all my life. I remember when it was just 25% of working filers paid no taxes. I was taxed on my 1st part time college job in the very early 80s. Add to that the NEW distorted concept of EITC that allows working poor refunds of Tax credits although they had ZERO tax liability. IN THEORY -- that could be an efficient alternative to the myriad of patchwork welfare handouts that exist. But in practice, we get nothing in return in terms of phasing out ANY existing element of the welfare establishment.

It was Reagan or maybe Kennedy, but I think it was Reagan, who spread out income taxes to even those making little, so that the wealthiest could have their huge tax break....

but it was not meant to be that way when income tax was created.....

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Aint' shifted a DAMN thing "from corporate to wage earners". The only wage earners paying ANY INCOME TAX AT ALL are making $100,000 or more. 1/2 of the wage earners now pay ZERO...

They pay payroll taxes, whose revenues are almost equal to income tax revenues and almost 5 times as much as corporate revenues.

That's because FICA is expensive. Those are UNIVERSAL programs. The proceeds are ONLY SUPPOSED to go for THEIR future benefit. I'm not impressed. Half of the folks in the pile pay ZERO to OPERATE the Federal govt. You cannot "load them" by cutting taxes elsewhere.

but the government has used about $3 TRILLION of social Security surplus funds to pay for expenditures that federal income taxes should have paid for....and now they are threatening and have reduced Social Security benefits because they can't afford to pay them back for what they used....

Also, since the beginning of taxes in this Nation, the poorest and poor overall, have not been taxed to pay for federal expenditures.... this is nothing new....

you simply can't get blood out of a turnip... it is inhumane to take from the poor, and has always been recognized as such....

since early Biblical times..... the poorest were never tithed, they received the tithe.

I'm sorry - but bullshit.
If I had a nickel for every time I saw somone use an EBT card to buy food, and then pay separately for a carton of cigarettes.
Complete with a handful of tattoos on them.
The poor are the only population left that still smoke in large percentages. And smoking is extremely expensive.
The Bible?? lol
There is no poverty in America that even begins to resemble biblical poverty.
How many poor people grow gardens to save on groceries? Like...none.
How many do odd jobs, use their trucks to haul stuff for people for cash?.... very, very few.
Right now we have two chairs, an old cabinet TV and an old washer in the basement. We have tried for 3 weeks to find someone to haul it out.
We posted on a local "looking to hire" website.... A group face book page... asked around.... can't find anyone. $100 plus $30 dump fee.
A $100 for about an hours work, and we can't find anyone.

 

[edthecynic]

Aint' shifted a DAMN thing "from corporate to wage earners". The only wage earners paying ANY INCOME TAX AT ALL are making $100,000 or more. 1/2 of the wage earners now pay ZERO...

They pay payroll taxes, whose revenues are almost equal to income tax revenues and almost 5 times as much as corporate revenues.

That's because FICA is expensive. Those are UNIVERSAL programs. The proceeds are ONLY SUPPOSED to go for THEIR future benefit. I'm not impressed. Half of the folks in the pile pay ZERO to OPERATE the Federal govt. You cannot "load them" by cutting taxes elsewhere.

But they DON"T only go for their future benefit!!! How do you think they get to project a deficit of only $890 billion when they are already in debt over $1.1+ trillion??? That extra $3 to $4 hundred billion is coming from payroll taxes!

For the current budget year, which ends Sept. 30, the administration is now projecting a deficit of $890 billion.

 

[edthecynic]

It was Reagan or maybe Kennedy, but I think it was Reagan, who spread out income taxes to even those making little, so that the wealthiest could have their huge tax break....

It was St Ronnie who started taxing Social Security retirement benefits as income.

 

[flacaltenn]

But they DON"T only go for their future benefit!!! How do you think they get to project a deficit of only $890 billion when they are already in debt over $1.1+ trillion??? That extra $3 to $4 hundred billion is coming from payroll taxes!

Not any more. SocSec hasn't had a surplus to steal in over 7 years. It's not possible to show lower deficits by stealing the "overpayments" from the working poor anymore.

That WAS however, how Clinton and Gingrich "balanced" their budget. By counting the SSec MASSIVE surpluses for those years as THEIR income. Not trust fund investment.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

It was Reagan or maybe Kennedy, but I think it was Reagan, who spread out income taxes to even those making little, so that the wealthiest could have their huge tax break....

It was St Ronnie who started taxing Social Security retirement benefits as income.

And didn't count it as a tax increase....

 

[iamwhatiseem]

But they DON"T only go for their future benefit!!! How do you think they get to project a deficit of only $890 billion when they are already in debt over $1.1+ trillion??? That extra $3 to $4 hundred billion is coming from payroll taxes!

Not any more. SocSec hasn't had a surplus to steal in over 7 years. It's not possible to show lower deficits by stealing the "overpayments" from the working poor anymore.

That WAS however, how Clinton and Gingrich "balanced" their budget. By counting the SSec MASSIVE surpluses for those years as THEIR income. Not trust fund investment.

Would be no different than if you walked into your house and told your wife "I got a $3 an hour raise!!".... the next week she asks "hey....your paycheck is the same, I thought you got a raise?"..... "I did, all this time we haven't counted the money the company pays for us for SocSec.... I started counting it!".... now let's go buy a bigger house! We can afford it now!"

 

[rightwinger]

It has only been two years but by year 4 we need to have a surplus. Enough spending. Unfortunately it likely won't happen til year 5 because entitlements have to be addressed.

What about increasing revenue?[/QUOTWhat. Expenses would you like to

Aint' shifted a DAMN thing "from corporate to wage earners". The only wage earners paying ANY INCOME TAX AT ALL are making $100,000 or more. 1/2 of the wage earners now pay ZERO...

They pay payroll taxes, whose revenues are almost equal to income tax revenues and almost 5 times as much as corporate revenues.

That's because FICA is expensive. Those are UNIVERSAL programs. The proceeds are ONLY SUPPOSED to go for THEIR future benefit. I'm not impressed. Half of the folks in the pile pay ZERO to OPERATE the Federal govt. You cannot "load them" by cutting taxes elsewhere.

but the government has used about $3 TRILLION of social Security surplus funds to pay for expenditures that federal income taxes should have paid for....and now they are threatening and have reduced Social Security benefits because they can't afford to pay them back for what they used....

Also, since the beginning of taxes in this Nation, the poorest and poor overall, have not been taxed to pay for federal expenditures.... this is nothing new....

you simply can't get blood out of a turnip... it is inhumane to take from the poor, and has always been recognized as such....

since early Biblical times..... the poorest were never tithed, they received the tithe.

I'm sorry - but bullshit.
If I had a nickel for every time I saw somone use an EBT card to buy food, and then pay separately for a carton of cigarettes.
Complete with a handful of tattoos on them.
The poor are the only population left that still smoke in large percentages. And smoking is extremely expensive.
The Bible?? lol
There is no poverty in America that even begins to resemble biblical poverty.
How many poor people grow gardens to save on groceries? Like...none.
How many do odd jobs, use their trucks to haul stuff for people for cash?.... very, very few.
Right now we have two chairs, an old cabinet TV and an old washer in the basement. We have tried for 3 weeks to find someone to haul it out.
We posted on a local "looking to hire" website.... A group face book page... asked around.... can't find anyone. $100 plus $30 dump fee.
A $100 for about an hours work, and we can't find anyone.

So, in your view

Our poor do not suffer enough

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

That WAS however, how Clinton and Gingrich "balanced" their budget. By counting the SSec MASSIVE surpluses for those years as THEIR income. Not trust fund investment.

A fact that has been pointed out to Clintonistas ad nauseum and yet they just pretend they don't know about this and continue to gloat about their glory years when Clinton left Bush a surplus to be squandered away.

 

[eagle1462010]

The GOP can fix all this with one teeny, tiny little change: Cut spending before taxes.

During campaigns, tell us EXACTLY what you're going to CUT first. Medicare, Medicaid, Welfare, Social Security, Departments, ALL OF IT.

Then, see if you get elected.

If you do, first make those cuts, and then cut taxes.

Easy peasy! You're welcome!
.

Easier fix is cut defense (really war department) by 90% and eliminate the CIA and NSA. Win win for all Americans and the world.

Well, I'd love to see the plan.

The GOP is never very forthcoming during campaigns, unfortunately.
.

I'm sure you would as Dems play politics on everything. What are Dems solution. You complain and offer notgnot in return.

Tax cuts historically increase revenue.

Are you saying you wouldn't make any cuts?

Isn't it fiscally responsible to follow through on promises?

Specificity would be helpful.
.

You FIRST..............show us your Great plans to SAVE US.........

I'm tired of people like you DEMANDING we show plans and OFFER NOTHING IN RETURN.........

Many plans and tactics have been presented by the GOP over time........and every time someone like you says.........YOU SUCK.......and when you are asked your plan we get nothing but static....................

So now ..............tell us your GRAND PLAN TO SAVE US ALL...........It is your turn.....not mine..........over time I've posted many things.

 

[Care4all]

But they DON"T only go for their future benefit!!! How do you think they get to project a deficit of only $890 billion when they are already in debt over $1.1+ trillion??? That extra $3 to $4 hundred billion is coming from payroll taxes!

Not any more. SocSec hasn't had a surplus to steal in over 7 years. It's not possible to show lower deficits by stealing the "overpayments" from the working poor anymore.

That WAS however, how Clinton and Gingrich "balanced" their budget. By counting the SSec MASSIVE surpluses for those years as THEIR income. Not trust fund investment.

I had thought so too, that there were no more SS Surpluses but I just checked and there are still surpluses of of Social Security and the federal Budget is still borrowing it, look at 2017!!!

Shoot! Some of my screen shot was cut off! But it still shows the important parts, in 2017 there was a $44.1 BILLION dollar surplus!!!

here's the link with the full charts....

Social Security Ran a $44 Billion Surplus in 2017 -- So, Why Is the Program in Trouble?

 

[Lysistrata]

I still want a full accounting of all money spent on the invasion of Iraq, including those funds borrowed.

 

[Care4all]

flacaltenn ...this is our first year with income taxes after the 16th amendment was passed in 1912...

Federal Income Tax Brackets for Tax Year 1912 (Filed April 1913)

the personal exemption, which I wrongly called the standard deduction earlier was $3000, before they were taxed....

I just looked up what $3000 in 1913 is in today's dollars and it is:

Details

$3,000 in 1913 dollars equals $74,704.24 in 2018

HOLY SMOKES! The first $74,000 of today's earned income, WAS NOT TAXED.....

SO, not only was the poor not taxed, but most of the middle class was not taxed either..... it was mainly an income tax on the wealthiest ONLY.