skins Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Link to article with interesting charts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meat Face Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 getting flatter, but still not there. flatter would be more fair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H8tank Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 So you think more than 60% of americans should have to pay someone to do their taxes? Â You think our prices for goods should be infated by Billions by the tax code? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins Posted April 22, 2005 Author Share Posted April 22, 2005 getting flatter, but still not there. flatter would be more fair. 790004[/snapback]     Flatter than an effective rate of 32% on the top 1% (those making around $1 million/year) and 27% for the middle 20% (those making about $34,500/year)?  What are you looking for exactly, abolition of progressive taxation? Why do you want to shift the tax burden to the middle class? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 what's the problem? anyway i'm reading the article and not really seeing how the current tax system is demonstrably "flatter" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 "That's the goal of the president and Congress - to shift the tax and debt burden to middle-income Americans," charges Bob McIntyre, director of Citizens for Tax Justice (CTJ), a liberal Washington think tank that crunched the numbers.  wonder who these guys are, hmmm  how is the burden being shifted to the middle class again?  in 1979 the middle paid 18.2%, 17.7% in 1985, 17.5% in 1997, 14.6% in 2004. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meat Face Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 (edited) Flatter than an effective rate of 32% on the top 1% (those making around $1 million/year) and 27% for the middle 20% (those making about $34,500/year)? What are you looking for exactly, abolition of progressive taxation? Why do you want to shift the tax burden to the middle class?  790021[/snapback]     Yeah I'd like flat tax over progressive. Or less progressive. Fair = everyone pays the same percentage. We aren't a communist society, so there are going to be inequalities in income. That doesn't mean that harder working people (middle class) should be punished because poorer people exist. Edited April 22, 2005 by Meat Face Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins Posted April 22, 2005 Author Share Posted April 22, 2005 wonder who these guys are, hmmm  how is the burden being shifted to the middle class again?  in 1979 the middle paid 18.2%, 17.7% in 1985, 17.5% in 1997, 14.6% in 2004.  790040[/snapback]     You left out the decrease percentages for the top 1% didnt you? They were far higher than those for the middle 20%. So the overall burden is being borne in a higher proportion by the middle class than before.  As for whether the raets have gotten flatter, do you not know what flatter means in this context, Asz? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 You left out the decrease percentages for the top 1% didnt you? They were far higher than those for the middle 20%. So the overall burden is being borne in a higher proportion by the middle class than before. Â 790085[/snapback] Â Â Â Â they went from 28% to 24% Â that article actually doesn't have a chart logging shifts in who's bearing the tax burden over time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 I just wanted to shrug. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meat Face Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 don't forget, the huge problem is not how people are taxed but rather how the money is spent. And how MUCH money is spent. This is what's out of control. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 We aren't a communist society, so there are going to be inequalities in income. That doesn't mean that harder working people (middle class) should be punished because poorer people exist. 790079[/snapback]     You have correlated "harder working people" with being middle class, and thus implied that poor people do not work hard. Is this what you intended? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puddy Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 The flat tax sounds great in theory. It will never come to fruition. The wealthy will always pay a bigger portion than everyone else. I for one, don't have a problem with it (unless I become wealthy ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steeler Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 You left out the decrease percentages for the top 1% didnt you? They were far higher than those for the middle 20%. So the overall burden is being borne in a higher proportion by the middle class than before. Â 790085[/snapback] Â Â Â I didn't read the artilce, but doesn't this argument assume the tax rate for the top 1% was set at the proper level when the study began? You say it's flatter now and therefore unfair... but maybe it was too steep before? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins Posted April 23, 2005 Author Share Posted April 23, 2005 I didn't read the artilce, but doesn't this argument assume the tax rate for the top 1% was set at the proper level when the study began? You say it's flatter now and therefore unfair... but maybe it was too steep before? 790948[/snapback]     The article doesnt take a position about what the proper rates should be nor do I. It just points out that now the rates are much flatter than 20-30 years ago and only getting flatter. I am not saying it is fair or not.  Everyone has to draw their own conclusions about whether progressive income taxation is the best way to go (I think so against my own interest) or whether a flat or flatter rate is better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squeegiebo Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 We aren't a communist society, Â 790079[/snapback] Â Â Â I know. :bawling: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meat Face Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 (edited)  You have correlated "harder working people" with being middle class, and thus implied that poor people do not work hard. Is this what you intended? 790905[/snapback]     I'm willing to bet that OVERALL middle class people work harder than poor people. I grew up around each unfortunately and that's my experience. My mom got out of lower middle class by busting her ass harder than anyone I've seen. Edited April 23, 2005 by Meat Face Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins Posted April 23, 2005 Author Share Posted April 23, 2005 (edited) I'm willing to bet that OVERALL middle class people work harder than poor people. I grew up around each unfortunately and that's my experience. My mom got out of lower middle class by busting her ass harder than anyone I've seen. 791126[/snapback]     Not accurate. You would lose that bet. You have turned into a Republican demonizing the poor as lazy because they make and have less. Edited April 23, 2005 by skins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 I'm willing to bet that OVERALL middle class people work harder than poor people. I grew up around each unfortunately and that's my experience. My mom got out of lower middle class by busting her ass harder than anyone I've seen. 791126[/snapback]     It really depends on what you call hard work. I spend 10 hours a day in the office, and work some weekends, so I consider that "hard work". However, working an 8 hour shift as a hotel cleaner for minimum wage is also hard work, especially when that person goes straight from there to a second job in order to just stay alive. It's silly to say that one "class" works harder than another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meat Face Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 (edited) Not accurate. You would lose that bet. You have turned into a Republican demonizing the poor as lazy because they make and have less. 791200[/snapback]      First of all, I'm not a republican.  Second, I simply relayed my experience. If you have a comparable experience, let's hear it. If not, stop talking out of your ass and back it up with evidence.  I get the impression from you that you think there shouldn't be poor people and that poor people are just those that have been oppressed by the rich or something like this. We aren't commies, so there are going to be poor people no matter what. Yes, it's unfortunate for the poor kids that they were born into a bad situation, but what does that have to do with taxes? Not everyone can be equal, because certain folks work harder and/or are smarter. Theoretically they can bust ass and make it if they want. This is America still. Check out the 'Reallionaire' kid.  So, is it the fault of a poor kid that he's born into a crappy situation? No. Is it his fault if he doesn't take advantage of all the great opportunities America has to offer - college, etc? Yes. Is it the fault of more wealthy people (you, for example) that the poor are the way they are? No. Should you be required to subsidize someone who chooses to sit on their ass their whole life? No. Can you if you want to? Yes, it's called charity.  Why do you hate freedom and fairness?  P.S. Most of this is a matter of opinion anyway. I mean, if you want to be taxed 30-40% and have the government tell you what to do, then that's fine. I happen to like having as much freedom of choice in my life as possible, but that's just my personal preference. Edited April 23, 2005 by Meat Face Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skins Posted April 23, 2005 Author Share Posted April 23, 2005 (edited) I shouldnt say you are a Republican, just that you sound like one. You want me to provide evidence that poor people arent lazier than the middle class? Â No thanks. I am content to let you keep believing that. Tip though, I wouldnt say it out loud around people you dont know very well. They might think yer a slow. Â Libertarianism! Wow! Fair tax! Wow! Get rid if social security! More money in my pocket! Yer like an excited kid with new toys. Â About my beliefs, I think there will always be poor people. I think a society and an individual are both measured on how they help others. I sit on the board of directors of a nonprofit and give far more than just money. I pay high taxes in my state and am happy to do so because my state takes care of the old, the disabled, the mentally handicapped, pays teachers, cops and firemen far more than almost the whole country. I expect my federal taxes to be used to help people also. Â If you disagree with those values, fine. So far, most of what I pick up from yer political positions is that you want more money in yer pocket and you kind of like trendy stuff. I can relate, trust me. I am a clawing aggressive bassturd (lawyer remember). I just dont only think about myself. Edited April 23, 2005 by skins Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meat Face Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Libertarianism! Wow! Fair tax! Wow! Get rid if social security! More money in my pocket! Yer like an excited kid with new toys. Â If you disagree with those values, fine. So far, most of what I pick up from yer political positions is that you want more money in yer pocket and you kind of like trendy stuff. I can relate, trust me. I am a clawing aggressive bassturd (lawyer remember). I just dont only think about myself. Â 791254[/snapback] Â Â Â Â You're missing the point, good sir. I agree with your values. I just don't think they should be government-mandated. See the difference? People should be free to do those things if they choose. I just don't think it's the government's responsibility to do them. Â Also, I'm not sure what trendy things you are referring to. The idea of FairTax has been around a long time. As has Libertarianism and getting rid of S.S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 You're missing the point, good sir. I agree with your values. I just don't think they should be government-mandated. See the difference? People should be free to do those things if they choose. I just don't think it's the government's responsibility to do them.  791267[/snapback]     Yes, that's true. And if they don't choose, what then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meat Face Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 Yes, that's true. And if they don't choose, what then? 791305[/snapback]     well then they were free to choose. And maybe they're a-holes. But at least they're in control of their lives and not someone else. I happen to believe government's function is not a charity house (that's a church's job), but that's just my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted April 23, 2005 Share Posted April 23, 2005 I would probably also tend to agree that, on average, middle-class people work harder than the poorest people in our economy. I am less certain however that this relationship between income and effort is monotonically increasing throughout the wealth distribution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.