Why should the rich pay taxes at a lower rate than the rest of us?

[Chris]

That's primarily because they derive their incomes from investments, rather than wages, you buffoon.

You know who else also derives a good share of their incomes from investment income?...Retirees.

Why is it that liberoidal dochebags hate old folx?

Because it suits them to demgogue the issue by scaring the bejesus out of them by telling them that Conservatives seek to destroy Socialist Security/Medicare and whatever else they can dream up and all for thier power trip.

Conservatives do want to destroy Social Security, so their buddies on Wall Street can get their hands on all that delicious retirement money.

 

[Chris]

Richest 400 Earn More, Pay Lower Tax Rate - Forbes.com

WASHINGTON, D.C.--The 400 highest-earning taxpayers in the U.S. reported a record $105 billion in total adjusted gross income in 2006, but they paid just $18 billion in tax, new Internal Revenue Service figures show. That works out to an average federal income tax bite of 17%--the lowest rate paid by the richest 400 during the 15-year period covered by the IRS statistics. The average federal tax bite on the top 400 was 30% in 1995 and 23% in 2002.

 

[Chris]

 

[Oddball]

 

[mudwhistle]

WASHINGTON, D.C.--The 400 highest-earning taxpayers in the U.S. reported a record $105 billion in total adjusted gross income in 2006, but they paid just $18 billion in tax, new Internal Revenue Service figures show. That works out to an average federal income tax bite of 17%--the lowest rate paid by the richest 400 during the 15-year period covered by the IRS statistics. The average federal tax bite on the top 400 was 30% in 1995 and 23% in 2002.

Richest 400 Earn More, Pay Lower Tax Rate - Forbes.com

They still pay over 50% of all Federal taxes. You're focusing only on income-taxes. Not all of the other taxes they pay just to keep their businesses running.

But you go ahead and pay more taxes so you can be even more patriotic......or idiotic.

 

[saveliberty]

Why should the rich pay a lower rate in taxes than the rest of us? Because a long time ago smart people realized that investing in businesses created jobs and a better life for most Americans. That capital came from those who could invest. Out of this wisdom grew the idea of a capital gains tax, which was lower than earned income rates to encourage this investment. System works really well, until the government decides they NEED more money.

 

[Chris]

Why should the rich pay a lower rate in taxes than the rest of us? Because a long time ago smart people realized that investing in businesses created jobs and a better life for most Americans. That capital came from those who could invest. Out of this wisdom grew the idea of a capital gains tax, which was lower than earned income rates to encourage this investment. System works really well, until the government decides they NEED more money.

The tax rate for the rich in the 90's was 30% and unemployment was 5%.

The tax rate for the rich now is 17% and umemployment is 9%.

Did lowering taxes for the rich create jobs or eliminate them?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why should the rich pay a lower rate in taxes than the rest of us? Because a long time ago smart people realized that investing in businesses created jobs and a better life for most Americans. That capital came from those who could invest. Out of this wisdom grew the idea of a capital gains tax, which was lower than earned income rates to encourage this investment. System works really well, until the government decides they NEED more money.

The tax rate for the rich in the 90's was 30% and unemployment was 5%.

The tax rate for the rich now is 17% and umemployment is 9%.

Did lowering taxes for the rich create jobs or eliminate them?

Actually, the tax rate for the rich now is 35%, and unemployment is 9%+. If we apply your logic we should lower the taxes. but the truth si those numbers have nothing to do with one another.

 

[Chris]

Why should the rich pay a lower rate in taxes than the rest of us? Because a long time ago smart people realized that investing in businesses created jobs and a better life for most Americans. That capital came from those who could invest. Out of this wisdom grew the idea of a capital gains tax, which was lower than earned income rates to encourage this investment. System works really well, until the government decides they NEED more money.

The tax rate for the rich in the 90's was 30% and unemployment was 5%.

The tax rate for the rich now is 17% and umemployment is 9%.

Did lowering taxes for the rich create jobs or eliminate them?

Actually, the tax rate for the rich now is 35%, and unemployment is 9%+. If we apply your logic we should lower the taxes. but the truth si those numbers have nothing to do with one another.

WASHINGTON, D.C.--The 400 highest-earning taxpayers in the U.S. reported a record $105 billion in total adjusted gross income in 2006, but they paid just $18 billion in tax, new Internal Revenue Service figures show. That works out to an average federal income tax bite of 17%--the lowest rate paid by the richest 400 during the 15-year period covered by the IRS statistics. The average federal tax bite on the top 400 was 30% in 1995 and 23% in 2002.

Richest 400 Earn More, Pay Lower Tax Rate - Forbes.com

 

[Cecilie1200]

WASHINGTON, D.C.--The 400 highest-earning taxpayers in the U.S. reported a record $105 billion in total adjusted gross income in 2006, but they paid just $18 billion in tax, new Internal Revenue Service figures show. That works out to an average federal income tax bite of 17%--the lowest rate paid by the richest 400 during the 15-year period covered by the IRS statistics. The average federal tax bite on the top 400 was 30% in 1995 and 23% in 2002.

Richest 400 Earn More, Pay Lower Tax Rate - Forbes.com

The rich pay a lower rate on income taxes? Since when? .......

Leftist twits don't bother to differentiate between types of taxes. That way, they don't have to admit that the rich pay much higher income tax rates, and that anyone who has investment income can take advantage of that rate. In fact, I believe the fact that so many people who AREN'T rich have investments - such as retirees, people with a 401k, pension funds, etc. - is the reason it's not particularly high compared to income tax.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The tax rate for the rich in the 90's was 30% and unemployment was 5%.

The tax rate for the rich now is 17% and umemployment is 9%.

Did lowering taxes for the rich create jobs or eliminate them?

Actually, the tax rate for the rich now is 35%, and unemployment is 9%+. If we apply your logic we should lower the taxes. but the truth si those numbers have nothing to do with one another.

WASHINGTON, D.C.--The 400 highest-earning taxpayers in the U.S. reported a record $105 billion in total adjusted gross income in 2006, but they paid just $18 billion in tax, new Internal Revenue Service figures show. That works out to an average federal income tax bite of 17%--the lowest rate paid by the richest 400 during the 15-year period covered by the IRS statistics. The average federal tax bite on the top 400 was 30% in 1995 and 23% in 2002.

Richest 400 Earn More, Pay Lower Tax Rate - Forbes.com

That actually just proves you are an idiot, but thanks for playing.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You did not answer the question.

Why should the rich pay taxes at a lower rate than the rest of us?

Yes i did, they don't pay a lower rate of income tax, liar......

Income that is derived from investments is taxed much lower than if you worked a job to earn the income.

Yes, but it isn't "the rich" who pay that rate. It's ANYONE with investment income. And believe it or not, the vast majority of people with investment income are NOT rich (note I did not say "the vast majority of investment income doesn't belong to rich people". No goalpost-moving, please.)

 

[IndependntLogic]

WASHINGTON, D.C.--The 400 highest-earning taxpayers in the U.S. reported a record $105 billion in total adjusted gross income in 2006, but they paid just $18 billion in tax, new Internal Revenue Service figures show. That works out to an average federal income tax bite of 17%--the lowest rate paid by the richest 400 during the 15-year period covered by the IRS statistics. The average federal tax bite on the top 400 was 30% in 1995 and 23% in 2002.

Richest 400 Earn More, Pay Lower Tax Rate - Forbes.com

People with higher incomes have almost always paid less in taxes. Their rate doesn't matter because they have so many more tools at their disposal for avoidance (as opposed to evasion).
For example, we just structured the comp for a partner at a law firm. He'll get a million a year but it's broken down in a few different ways. $200K will come as shares in the firm - which have a guaranteed buyout plus interest for every year he stays. Some will go to the firm's investment fund. Think about the value of that. These guys know who is going to Merge / Acquire etc... before it ever happens. Not that they would ever use that info to their advantage Then there is the retirement account, life insurance etc...
So he'll end up with an actual income of about $500K. But wait there's more! As a partner, he gets a company car - a Mercedes 500CLS. His Learjet (which isn't as great as a Gulfstream but it's still COOL!) is deductible. So are his phones, computers, membership in the country club and so on.
So even though he uses these things for personal purposes (as well as business of course), he'll get at least $100K off the top.
Then of course, his wife owns an interior decorating business. She has to buy all kinds of expensive furniture for their home because she uses it as a showcase. Her business loses about $100K for two years and then shows a profit of $20K for one year. That means once every three years they pay an extra $10K in taxes - but 2 out of 3 years, they save $50K in taxes PLUS they get to write of the cost of a lot of their funrinture! (We're talking $30K for a dining room set folks).
So he'll end up paying income taxes on about $350 - $400K. Probably around 20% or so of his income. Now this isn't a bad guy. He's not doing anything wrong. That's just how our tax code is written. The moment I started my own business (a legal recruiting firm), I got a couple dozen deductions you don't get. The more I make, the more I can avoid paying taxes on. It's just how it works.
Now. Can a manager at a retail store making $50K a year afford to defer or divert half their income? Nope. Would they get the same tax breaks if they did? A few but not most of them because they're not a business owner like those 400 people to whom you refer.
Can a small business owner who makes $50K a year do what these folks do? Legally they can but in application, it's probably not practical. They'd starve.

So yes, the tax codes favor the rich. Oh well. As things are picking up for us (the legal biz is benefitting right now), I'm ambivalent. But would I lose sleep over two points on the NET? Not really.

I do find it interesting that the very people who have claimed all our problems would be solved if only we lowered taxes on "job creators", are now complaining about Obama's jobs bill - which is substantially tax cuts.
So Bush's temporary tax cuts were great but Obama's are terrible. Check.

 

[editec]

That's primarily because they derive their incomes from investments, rather than wages, you buffoon.

You know who else also derives a good share of their incomes from investment income?...Retirees.

Why is it that liberoidal dochebags hate old folx?

The vast majority of whom do not make enough money to worry about paying ANY taxes.

 

[Skull Pilot]

That's primarily because they derive their incomes from investments, rather than wages, you buffoon.

You know who else also derives a good share of their incomes from investment income?...Retirees.

Why is it that liberoidal dochebags hate old folx?

You did not answer the question.

Why should the rich pay taxes at a lower rate than the rest of us?

They don't. You pay the exact same capital gains tax rate that anyone else pays.

 

[asterism]

Why should the rich pay a lower rate in taxes than the rest of us? Because a long time ago smart people realized that investing in businesses created jobs and a better life for most Americans. That capital came from those who could invest. Out of this wisdom grew the idea of a capital gains tax, which was lower than earned income rates to encourage this investment. System works really well, until the government decides they NEED more money.

The tax rate for the rich in the 90's was 30% and unemployment was 5%.

The tax rate for the rich now is 17% and umemployment is 9%.

Did lowering taxes for the rich create jobs or eliminate them?

The tax rate for the rich in the 90's was 30% and unemployment was 5%.

The tax rate for the rich now is 17% and umemployment is 9%.

Did lowering taxes for the rich create jobs or eliminate them?

Actually, the tax rate for the rich now is 35%, and unemployment is 9%+. If we apply your logic we should lower the taxes. but the truth si those numbers have nothing to do with one another.

WASHINGTON, D.C.--The 400 highest-earning taxpayers in the U.S. reported a record $105 billion in total adjusted gross income in 2006, but they paid just $18 billion in tax, new Internal Revenue Service figures show. That works out to an average federal income tax bite of 17%--the lowest rate paid by the richest 400 during the 15-year period covered by the IRS statistics. The average federal tax bite on the top 400 was 30% in 1995 and 23% in 2002.

Richest 400 Earn More, Pay Lower Tax Rate - Forbes.com

Show me what rate those same 400 people paid in the 1990s.

You are disingenuous when you say "the tax rate for the rich is now 17%." It's the average tax rate for those 400 people.

 

[saveliberty]

It is just a refleciton of the capital gains rate on the bulk of the income and tax credits they were allowed under the tax code. I suppose it would be too easy to just remove some of the credits? Oh, but it might tax some Democratic Congress members at a higher rate.

 

[martybegan]

That's primarily because they derive their incomes from investments, rather than wages, you buffoon.

You know who else also derives a good share of their incomes from investment income?...Retirees.

Why is it that liberoidal dochebags hate old folx?

Because it suits them to demgogue the issue by scaring the bejesus out of them by telling them that Conservatives seek to destroy Socialist Security/Medicare and whatever else they can dream up and all for thier power trip.

Conservatives do want to destroy Social Security, so their buddies on Wall Street can get their hands on all that delicious retirement money.

Why should wall street be any different than the federal government? For years they have used the surplus (which is now gone) as thier personal cookie jar, increasing the size of the federal budget and government, while hoping the surplus never went away.

Well its gone now, and SS will have to be paid out in part via the general budget.

 

[saveliberty]

Conservatives do want to destroy Social Security, so their buddies on Wall Street can get their hands on all that delicious retirement money.

If SS is destroyed Chris, there is no money to invest, they lost it all. You should be humming the Scare Crow theme song about now.



If he only had a brain.

 

[Defiant1]

You did not answer the question.

Why should the rich pay taxes at a lower rate than the rest of us?

Because the question is Flawed. The rich do not pay less taxes than we do. If their Income is in the form of Wages earned they pay the top Income tax %, If their income is from Capital Gains, they pay the same capital Gains % we all pay on our Investments and Retirement plans.

So your Question is BS.

You attached the question. You did not answer it.

Why should the rich pay taxes at a lower rate than the rest of us?

The rich SHOULD pay at a lower rate. If you take in consideration amount rather than percentage the rich are not only paying for their "fair share" but are paying the share for many, many others.

Further more the rich pay for services for others that they don't need or use.