Who Pays the Taxes? Who Should?

[Toro]

Don't you think it would be important to include a look at what % of wealth those groups hold compared with the tax %?

Did that thought never cross your mind?

Never in the history of the USA has there been a tax on wealth. Why do you think it necessary to start taxing wealth now? And how do you square that with property rights being included in our unalienable rights protected by the Constitution?

And that is the problem. The wealthy pay very little in taxes. You would start taxing them now because that is where the money is. And you have no property rights if the government decides to take your property by eminent domain, which has been found to be Constitutional by the SCOTUS.

The Truth About Taxes
August 6, 2007
RUSH: I've told you before: the income tax is designed to keep people like his [Buffett's] secretary from becoming wealthy! There is no "wealth" tax. So this is a big misnomer. ...
But there's no tax on wealth. There is a tax on income, and the tax on income is designed to keep everybody who is not wealthy from getting there.
I'm talking about genuine wealth, not the way Democrats define "rich."

The top quintile in income pays a higher rate of taxes than all others.

 

[Toro]

We had our greatest prosperity when the rich paid a top marginal rate of 93%, and a third of the workforce was unionized.

Simply put, when you make greed impractical, you limit its bad effects.

In 1980, the average CEO made 40 times what a line worker made.

Today the average CEO makes 478 times what a line worker makes.

Mitt Romney pays 14% tax rates on eight figures of income, and he didn't even claim all the deductions he was entitled to- yet. (He will after he loses the election.)

You do know that when the so called rich were paying 90% in 1952 that the lowest tax bracket (those making 0 to $4000 a year) was over 20% don't you?

Of course you don't because you are a ******* partisan sheep hack.

That, and no one actually paid 90%.

 

[RDD_1210]

Nope. Sorry to dissapoint but my thoughts go to business as well. Get rid of the tax loopholes, tax breaks, subsidies and EIC. Let the Govt keep all of its tax dollars from all sources.

Half the nation, for whatever reason, Doesn't pay Fed taxes. They pay State and Local unless they are on Welfare. Then they pay nothing.

The Fed Govt runs on taxes. Why should half the country not have to pay Fed taxes?? Makes no sense to me.

As I said. If you have no skin in the game you don't care. As long as your needs are met you really could give a rats ass where "your" money comes from as long as it comes.

AS for Mitt and anyone who lives on Capital Gains?? Hell. Hope I have enough invested to do the same. The money has already been taxed once and will be again. The Govt gets its share of it big time.

I asked you this before and I don't think you answered. The whole "no skin in the game" argument is pretty funny.

So, let me ask again. Is Federal income tax the only tax that matters?

Nope.

Some of that 49% do pay State and Local but State and Local Taxes don't fund the Govt. STate and local taxes fund the State and municipalities.

In fact I think the State and Local taxes are far more important to me as an individual than the Fed Taxes. But the fact remains that the Govt beast has to be fed and everyone should be feeding it. Including that pesky 49%.

RD thats my opinion. Yours may differ and I respect your opinion but it ain't mine buddy and it never will be.

Do you think the Federal government is funded solely by income taxes? It's actually less than 50% funded by federal income taxes, which makes your focus on that single portion a rather limited and incorrect view of people and them having "no skin in the game".

You do realize that there are other taxes that people pay that fund the federal government, don't you?

 

[MisterBeale]

There is no natural right to steal a mans wages in the form of taxes. That's pretty simple.

If you are a member of a society there is

Society (democracy) is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for lunch. I don't buy it, neither should you. Suppose you went to a public school? You think your curriculum handed down from the centralized government via the Department of Education is a choice? It isn't, it's compulsory. Did anyone have a choice how they were educated? Is that in the constitution?

Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.
~Vladimir Lenin

 

[edthecynic]

Never in the history of the USA has there been a tax on wealth. Why do you think it necessary to start taxing wealth now? And how do you square that with property rights being included in our unalienable rights protected by the Constitution?

And that is the problem. The wealthy pay very little in taxes. You would start taxing them now because that is where the money is. And you have no property rights if the government decides to take your property by eminent domain, which has been found to be Constitutional by the SCOTUS.

The Truth About Taxes
August 6, 2007
RUSH: I've told you before: the income tax is designed to keep people like his [Buffett's] secretary from becoming wealthy! There is no "wealth" tax. So this is a big misnomer. ...
But there's no tax on wealth. There is a tax on income, and the tax on income is designed to keep everybody who is not wealthy from getting there.
I'm talking about genuine wealth, not the way Democrats define "rich."

The top quintile in income pays a higher rate of taxes than all others.

The top quintile of WAGE income pays the highest tax rate.

August 7, 2007
CALLER: And, you know, and the way our tax system works, we have an overly complex system, which in and of itself is a problem, but the way our tax system works and the way the tax laws are written, it's based on a few kind of like hinge numbers like adjusted gross income and taxable income, and while the soak the rich -- or however you choose to describe it -- really doesn't come down that way. It really comes down to much lower income levels.

RUSH: It does, exactly, and here's the dirty little secret if you ever to pull it off. It's hard. This is why most people don't understand the tax-the-rich business. You've got to structure your life so you have no "earned" income. I'm out of time. I'll explain that. There's a category called earned income versus other kinds of income. Earned income is what the income tax rate is on. That's how "the rich" do it. They don't have "earned" income.
END TRANSCRIPT

 

[MisterBeale]

BTW, under the Obamacare legislation, some high level real estate sales will be subject to a 3.4% sales tax. This means little to the average joe, currently, but it is the nose under the tent for the federal government to start imposing sales taxes without doing away with the income tax.

You can bet your bottom dollar, that this tax will work its way down to the average joe, in a few short years. Just like the alternate minimum tax has.

Actually, it's not that "high level." Any house valued at a quarter million or more is subject to this tax. I really don't think houses that are $250,000 or more is "high level." If you happen to own your primary home that is of this value, and you are middle class, and you sell it, stay with your parents or friends while you are getting into a new house, the government will then sap away the value of your property while you are trying to move up into a bigger house if you have a growing family. This is for your PRIMARY residence.

What the hell does this have to do with health care?

I was alerted to this as I got an email from a family member. . .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I checked this on Snopes and it is both true and false. The 3.8% tax on profits applies to a capital gains threshold of $250,000 for individuals and $500,000 for couples. Middle income people must pay the full tax even if they are "rich" for only one day - the day they sell their house and buy a new one.

When does your home become part of your health care? After 2012!​

NEW HOME SALES TAX:
I thought you might find this interesting, -- maybe even SICKENING!


The National Association of Realtors is all over this and working to get it repealed, -- before it takes effect. But, I am very pleased we aren't the only ones who know about this ploy to steal billions from unsuspecting homeowners. How many realtors do you think will vote Democratic in 2012?

Did you know that if you sell your house after 2012 you will pay a 3.8% sales tax on it? That's $3,800 on a $100,000 home, etc. When did this happen? It's in the health care bill, -- and it goes into effect in 2013. Why 2013? Could it be so that it doesn't come to light until after the 2012 elections? So, this is change you can believe in??

Under the new health care bill all real estate transactions will be subject to a 3.8% sales tax.

If you sell a $200,000 home, there will be a $ 7,600 tax. This bill is set to screw the retiring generation, -- who often downsize their homes. Does this make your November, 2012 vote more important?

Oh, you weren't aware that this was in the ObamaCare bill? Guess what; you aren't alone! There are more than a few members of Congress that weren't aware of it either.
You can check this out for yourself at: ObamaCare Flatlines: ObamaCare Taxes Home Sales - Clobbers Middle-Class Americans - Blog - GOP.gov

 

[RDD_1210]

BTW, under the Obamacare legislation, some high level real estate sales will be subject to a 3.4% sales tax. This means little to the average joe, currently, but it is the nose under the tent for the federal government to start imposing sales taxes without doing away with the income tax.

You can bet your bottom dollar, that this tax will work its way down to the average joe, in a few short years. Just like the alternate minimum tax has.

Actually, it's not that "high level." Any house valued at a quarter million or more is subject to this tax. I really don't think houses that are $250,000 or more is "high level." If you happen to own your primary home that is of this value, and you are middle class, and you sell it, stay with your parents or friends while you are getting into a new house, the government will then sap away the value of your property while you are trying to move up into a bigger house if you have a growing family. This is for your PRIMARY residence.

What the hell does this have to do with health care?

I was alerted to this as I got an email from a family member. . .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I checked this on Snopes and it is both true and false. The 3.8% tax on profits applies to a capital gains threshold of $250,000 for individuals and $500,000 for couples. Middle income people must pay the full tax even if they are "rich" for only one day - the day they sell their house and buy a new one.

When does your home become part of your health care? After 2012!​

NEW HOME SALES TAX:
I thought you might find this interesting, -- maybe even SICKENING!


The National Association of Realtors is all over this and working to get it repealed, -- before it takes effect. But, I am very pleased we aren't the only ones who know about this ploy to steal billions from unsuspecting homeowners. How many realtors do you think will vote Democratic in 2012?

Did you know that if you sell your house after 2012 you will pay a 3.8% sales tax on it? That's $3,800 on a $100,000 home, etc. When did this happen? It's in the health care bill, -- and it goes into effect in 2013. Why 2013? Could it be so that it doesn't come to light until after the 2012 elections? So, this is change you can believe in??

Under the new health care bill all real estate transactions will be subject to a 3.8% sales tax.

If you sell a $200,000 home, there will be a $ 7,600 tax. This bill is set to screw the retiring generation, -- who often downsize their homes. Does this make your November, 2012 vote more important?

Oh, you weren't aware that this was in the ObamaCare bill? Guess what; you aren't alone! There are more than a few members of Congress that weren't aware of it either.
You can check this out for yourself at: ObamaCare Flatlines: ObamaCare Taxes Home Sales - Clobbers Middle-Class Americans - Blog - GOP.gov

You might want to check your "facts"


FactCheck.org : A 3.8 Percent “Sales Tax” on Your Home?

The truth is that only a tiny percentage of home sellers will pay the tax. First of all, only those with incomes over $200,000 a year ($250,000 for married couples filing jointly) will be subject to it. And even for those who have such high incomes, the tax still won’t apply to the first $250,000 on profits from the sale of a personal residence — or to the first $500,000 in the case of a married couple selling their home.

 

[Claudette]

I asked you this before and I don't think you answered. The whole "no skin in the game" argument is pretty funny.

So, let me ask again. Is Federal income tax the only tax that matters?

Nope.

Some of that 49% do pay State and Local but State and Local Taxes don't fund the Govt. STate and local taxes fund the State and municipalities.

In fact I think the State and Local taxes are far more important to me as an individual than the Fed Taxes. But the fact remains that the Govt beast has to be fed and everyone should be feeding it. Including that pesky 49%.

RD thats my opinion. Yours may differ and I respect your opinion but it ain't mine buddy and it never will be.

Do you think the Federal government is funded solely by income taxes? It's actually less than 50% funded by federal income taxes, which makes your focus on that single portion a rather limited and incorrect view of people and them having "no skin in the game".

You do realize that there are other taxes that people pay that fund the federal government, don't you?

Sure I do.

Individual income taxes and payroll taxes accounted for 82 percent of all federal revenues in fiscal year 2010. Corporate income taxes contributed another 9 percent. Excise taxes, estate and gift taxes, customs duties, and miscellaneous receipts (earnings of the Federal Reserve System and various fees and charges) made up the balance. The composition of tax revenue has changed markedly over the past half century. The share coming from individual income taxes has remained roughly constant, while payroll taxes have accounted for a larger share and corporate income and excise taxes smaller shares.

What are the federal government's sources of revenue?


This is from 2010 but I imagine its about the same every year.

 

[DiamondDave]

We had our greatest prosperity when the rich paid a top marginal rate of 93%, and a third of the workforce was unionized.

Simply put, when you make greed impractical, you limit its bad effects.

In 1980, the average CEO made 40 times what a line worker made.

Today the average CEO makes 478 times what a line worker makes.

Mitt Romney pays 14% tax rates on eight figures of income, and he didn't even claim all the deductions he was entitled to- yet. (He will after he loses the election.)

You do know that when the so called rich were paying 90% in 1952 that the lowest tax bracket (those making 0 to $4000 a year) was over 20% don't you?

Of course you don't because you are a ******* partisan sheep hack.

That, and no one actually paid 90%.

I repeat this til I am blue in the face... but the number to the left wingers makes a good war cry, to help recruit more ignorant souls

 

[DiamondDave]

I asked you this before and I don't think you answered. The whole "no skin in the game" argument is pretty funny.

So, let me ask again. Is Federal income tax the only tax that matters?

Nope.

Some of that 49% do pay State and Local but State and Local Taxes don't fund the Govt. STate and local taxes fund the State and municipalities.

In fact I think the State and Local taxes are far more important to me as an individual than the Fed Taxes. But the fact remains that the Govt beast has to be fed and everyone should be feeding it. Including that pesky 49%.

RD thats my opinion. Yours may differ and I respect your opinion but it ain't mine buddy and it never will be.

Do you think the Federal government is funded solely by income taxes? It's actually less than 50% funded by federal income taxes, which makes your focus on that single portion a rather limited and incorrect view of people and them having "no skin in the game".

You do realize that there are other taxes that people pay that fund the federal government, don't you?

And those that pay federal income tax pay those taxes too.. you MAY have a point if those that pay the income tax were not paying these other taxes

 

[RDD_1210]

Nope.

Some of that 49% do pay State and Local but State and Local Taxes don't fund the Govt. STate and local taxes fund the State and municipalities.

In fact I think the State and Local taxes are far more important to me as an individual than the Fed Taxes. But the fact remains that the Govt beast has to be fed and everyone should be feeding it. Including that pesky 49%.

RD thats my opinion. Yours may differ and I respect your opinion but it ain't mine buddy and it never will be.

Do you think the Federal government is funded solely by income taxes? It's actually less than 50% funded by federal income taxes, which makes your focus on that single portion a rather limited and incorrect view of people and them having "no skin in the game".

You do realize that there are other taxes that people pay that fund the federal government, don't you?

Sure I do.

Individual income taxes and payroll taxes accounted for 82 percent of all federal revenues in fiscal year 2010. Corporate income taxes contributed another 9 percent. Excise taxes, estate and gift taxes, customs duties, and miscellaneous receipts (earnings of the Federal Reserve System and various fees and charges) made up the balance. The composition of tax revenue has changed markedly over the past half century. The share coming from individual income taxes has remained roughly constant, while payroll taxes have accounted for a larger share and corporate income and excise taxes smaller shares.

What are the federal government's sources of revenue?


This is from 2010 but I imagine its about the same every year.

Ok, so if you're aware that payroll taxes account for a huge chunk of the federal revenue, you must know that a much lower % of people are exempt from paying those as well as income taxes. in 2009 the number of people who paid neither was 17%.

Most of the people who pay neither federal income tax nor payroll taxes are low-income people who are elderly, unable to work due to a serious disability, or students, most of whom subsequently become taxpayers.

Misconceptions and Realities About Who Pays Taxes — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

So that "47% of the country have no skin in the game" is misleading, wouldn't you agree? As it's closer to 17% and if you want to have a beef with elderly and disabled, then that's fine, but to act like almost half the country are getting off totally free is just wrong.

 

[RDD_1210]

Nope.

Some of that 49% do pay State and Local but State and Local Taxes don't fund the Govt. STate and local taxes fund the State and municipalities.

In fact I think the State and Local taxes are far more important to me as an individual than the Fed Taxes. But the fact remains that the Govt beast has to be fed and everyone should be feeding it. Including that pesky 49%.

RD thats my opinion. Yours may differ and I respect your opinion but it ain't mine buddy and it never will be.

Do you think the Federal government is funded solely by income taxes? It's actually less than 50% funded by federal income taxes, which makes your focus on that single portion a rather limited and incorrect view of people and them having "no skin in the game".

You do realize that there are other taxes that people pay that fund the federal government, don't you?

And those that pay federal income tax pay those taxes too.. you MAY have a point if those that pay the income tax were not paying these other taxes

The point which you don't seem to understand is that saying "47% don't have skin in the game" is blatantly false. As it has been shown that federal income taxes are not the only major source of federal revenue.

 

[DiamondDave]

Do you think the Federal government is funded solely by income taxes? It's actually less than 50% funded by federal income taxes, which makes your focus on that single portion a rather limited and incorrect view of people and them having "no skin in the game".

You do realize that there are other taxes that people pay that fund the federal government, don't you?

And those that pay federal income tax pay those taxes too.. you MAY have a point if those that pay the income tax were not paying these other taxes

The point which you don't seem to understand is that saying "47% don't have skin in the game" is blatantly false. As it has been shown that federal income taxes are not the only major source of federal revenue.

They do not have a skin in the federal income tax game, AND THEY SHOULD.. NOBODY should be exempt if they earn even $1 in any sort of income

Federal income taxes are not the only source of income, but OTHERS PAY THOSE TOO, not just those who are exempt from a federal income tax bill

 

[RDD_1210]

And those that pay federal income tax pay those taxes too.. you MAY have a point if those that pay the income tax were not paying these other taxes

The point which you don't seem to understand is that saying "47% don't have skin in the game" is blatantly false. As it has been shown that federal income taxes are not the only major source of federal revenue.

They do not have a skin in the federal income tax game, AND THEY SHOULD.. NOBODY should be exempt if they earn even $1 in any sort of income

Federal income taxes are not the only source of income, but OTHERS PAY THOSE TOO, not just those who are exempt from a federal income tax bill

Great, glad we could squash that myth then.

 

[DiamondDave]

The point which you don't seem to understand is that saying "47% don't have skin in the game" is blatantly false. As it has been shown that federal income taxes are not the only major source of federal revenue.

They do not have a skin in the federal income tax game, AND THEY SHOULD.. NOBODY should be exempt if they earn even $1 in any sort of income

Federal income taxes are not the only source of income, but OTHERS PAY THOSE TOO, not just those who are exempt from a federal income tax bill

Great, glad we could squash that myth then.

I never perpetuated any such myth... not once.. I have been very consistent on my stance and my statements

 

[catzmeow]

They do not have a skin in the federal income tax game, AND THEY SHOULD.. NOBODY should be exempt if they earn even $1 in any sort of income

Federal income taxes are not the only source of income, but OTHERS PAY THOSE TOO, not just those who are exempt from a federal income tax bill

Great, glad we could squash that myth then.

I never perpetuated any such myth... not once.. I have been very consistent on my stance and my statements

You realize, right, that as a veteran, you are one of the 96% of Americans who receives some sort of subsidy from the government?

 

[DiamondDave]

Great, glad we could squash that myth then.

I never perpetuated any such myth... not once.. I have been very consistent on my stance and my statements

You realize, right, that as a veteran, you are one of the 96% of Americans who receives some sort of subsidy from the government?

Um... no.. I do not...

Not all veterans receive benefits... and those are an EMPLOYMENT BENEFIT as part of contractual compensation... What next?? Obamalama himself is a receiver of a subsidy because he is employed by the Fed??

You are a goddamn idiot

 

[RDD_1210]

They do not have a skin in the federal income tax game, AND THEY SHOULD.. NOBODY should be exempt if they earn even $1 in any sort of income

Federal income taxes are not the only source of income, but OTHERS PAY THOSE TOO, not just those who are exempt from a federal income tax bill

Great, glad we could squash that myth then.

I never perpetuated any such myth... not once.. I have been very consistent on my stance and my statements

Great, maybe then you can help me explain that to Claudette, who I see is reading these posts because she just thanked your previous post, yet she doesn't want to respond to the facts that I've pointed out to her.

 

[Claudette]

Great, glad we could squash that myth then.

I never perpetuated any such myth... not once.. I have been very consistent on my stance and my statements

Great, maybe then you can help me explain that to Claudette, who I see is reading these posts because she just thanked your previous post, yet she doesn't want to respond to the facts that I've pointed out to her.

Yes you've pointed out some facts but you also don't seem to want to admit that we have loads of freeloaders in this country. Thats a fact as well.

Folks who pay for nothing but have no problem sucking up anything they can from the taxpayers of this country.

Those are the folks I have a problem with. They have no skin in the game and if they have their way they never will.

 

[RDD_1210]

I never perpetuated any such myth... not once.. I have been very consistent on my stance and my statements

Great, maybe then you can help me explain that to Claudette, who I see is reading these posts because she just thanked your previous post, yet she doesn't want to respond to the facts that I've pointed out to her.

Yes you've pointed out some facts but you also don't seem to want to admit that we have loads of freeloaders in this country. Thats a fact as well.

Folks who pay for nothing but have no problem sucking up anything they can from the taxpayers of this country.

Those are the folks I have a problem with. They have no skin in the game and if they have their way they never will.

I've pointed out that 17% are the "free loaders who pay nothing", the rest of the "47%" you mentioned do in fact pay taxes. And I also showed who makes up that 17% who pay nothing. Mostly elderly and disabled. Are these the people you have a problem with and would like to discuss?