gbpfan1231 Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 But I see lots of people advocating lowering corporate tax rates, which would surely increase the amount that GE received. And I seriously doubt GE is alone. ETA: And have they used their tax gift to create jobs, per the received wisdom of lower rates? I am 99% sure the people that advocate lowering corporate tax rates also advocate eliminating these loophole at the same time. You are smart enough to know that is the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SayItAintSoJoe Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Now all the wealth enviers will keep up the cry of "fairness" to justify their tax increases, when the wealthiest 1% earn 19% of the income but pay 37% of the taxes. Man, that's just so unfair - to the people who're paying those taxes. So do you think that someone who makes 12K/yr should pay the same percentage of their wages to taxes as someone in the richest 1%? I don't, because I know that someone who makes 12K/yr is poor as hell to begin with. So whenever I hear stats about how such a small percentage of Americans pay such a big percentage of the taxes it just tells me that there are a hell of a lot of poor people in this country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 So do you think that someone who makes 12K/yr should pay the same percentage of their wages to taxes as someone in the richest 1%? I've never heard anyone advocate that. flat tax proposals all contain a fairly large personal exemption...like say your first $12K as an individual, $24K as a couple, and so on is exempt. that keeps the actual tax incidence fairly progressive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SayItAintSoJoe Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Now all the wealth enviers will keep up the cry of "fairness" to justify their tax increases, when the wealthiest 1% earn 19% of the income but pay 37% of the taxes. Man, that's just so unfair - to the people who're paying those taxes. I've never heard anyone advocate that. flat tax proposals all contain a fairly large personal exemption...like say your first $12K as an individual, $24K as a couple, and so on is exempt. that keeps the actual tax incidence fairly progressive. WV states that it is unfair for 1% of the population, that "only" earns 19% of the total income, to pay 37% of the taxes. I want to know if he thinks that they should only pay 19% of the total taxes. Is that what he considers fair? I don't know how to get that 37% down to 19% while allowing so many (poor ass) people in this country to have their entire income exempt from taxes. Republicans like to throw out the small % of folks paying big % of taxes stat to somehow prove that the rich are being unfairly taxed. On the surface those percentages can appear to show that but to me they indicate something else. The widening of the gap between the rich and the poor, a.k.a . the shrinking of the middle class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Surprisingly, a not insignificant number of those who are clearly well off are also among the “lucky duckies.” There are 78,000 tax filers with incomes of $211,000 to $533,000 who will pay no federal income taxes this year. Even more amazingly, there are 24,000 households with incomes of $533,000 to $2.2 million with zero income tax liability, and 3,000 tax filers with incomes above $2.2 million with the same federal income tax liability as most of those with incomes barely above the poverty level. Where's the outrage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 (edited) Ten companies that don't pay taxes. But let's clamor toward those in poverty, because we need to "broaden the base." Edited August 13, 2011 by bushwacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Ten companies that don't pay taxes. But let's clamor toward those in poverty, because we need to "broaden the base." If you would get that sausage out of your mouth for one second... NOBODY is saying that anyone over 200k should not pay taxes - show me one time where someone says that. I am assuming anyone and everyone who is clamoring for broadening the base is clamoring for what you have just shot your load on - broadeing the base would include all of the people you mentioned paying in. Did that big dik bump into your smallish brain??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Republicans like to throw out the small % of folks paying big % of taxes stat to somehow prove that the rich are being unfairly taxed. On the surface those percentages can appear to show that but to me they indicate something else. The widening of the gap between the rich and the poor, a.k.a . the shrinking of the middle class. What it means is that some people are so rich that by paying what they owe in taxes their dollar amount makes up 19% of all income. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 NOBODY is saying that anyone over 200k should not pay taxes - show me one time where someone says that. Nobody is saying that word for word. But the elected officials are letting it happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 If you would get that sausage out of your mouth for one second... NOBODY is saying that anyone over 200k should not pay taxes - show me one time where someone says that. I am assuming anyone and everyone who is clamoring for broadening the base is clamoring for what you have just shot your load on - broadeing the base would include all of the people you mentioned paying in. Did that big dik bump into your smallish brain??? You really do come across like a child when you follow me around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 So do you think that someone who makes 12K/yr should pay the same percentage of their wages to taxes as someone in the richest 1%? I don't, because I know that someone who makes 12K/yr is poor as hell to begin with. So whenever I hear stats about how such a small percentage of Americans pay such a big percentage of the taxes it just tells me that there are a hell of a lot of poor people in this country. Gerry Brown ran on this in 1992, and he used the number of 17: your first 17k of income is not taxed (the national VAT was 17% and I believe things like rent and mortgages were fully deductible as well). I've never seen a flat tax proposal without a hefty first exemption like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted August 13, 2011 Author Share Posted August 13, 2011 WV states that it is unfair for 1% of the population, that "only" earns 19% of the total income, to pay 37% of the taxes. I want to know if he thinks that they should only pay 19% of the total taxes. Is that what he considers fair? I don't know how to get that 37% down to 19% while allowing so many (poor ass) people in this country to have their entire income exempt from taxes. Republicans like to throw out the small % of folks paying big % of taxes stat to somehow prove that the rich are being unfairly taxed. On the surface those percentages can appear to show that but to me they indicate something else. The widening of the gap between the rich and the poor, a.k.a . the shrinking of the middle class. In context, my quote was about people saying "those disgusting evil filthy nasty rich people don't pay their FAIR SHARE! WAAAAAAAHHHHHH!" In fact, as the numbers show, they CLEARLY do. And I'm a fair taxer, which means a family of four pays no taxes until their over some $40K (IIRC - that number is close). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 You really do come across like a child when you follow me around. If I did then yes I would. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted August 13, 2011 Author Share Posted August 13, 2011 And as for the person quoting GE, they might be this president's most aggregious example of corruption. They stand to gain a TON from all the green stuff. they're one of his biggest supporters, and they own NBC, whose news channels have done nothing but slobber all over obamessiah. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 And as for the person quoting GE, they might be this president's most aggregious example of corruption. They stand to gain a TON from all the green stuff. they're one of his biggest supporters, and they own NBC, whose news channels have done nothing but slobber all over obamessiah. egregious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 egregious Come on Big John, us Southerners are just being exposed to these words for the first time. Thanks to the invention of the internet. Cut us some slack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Here's point number 8 from the "study": 8. Do the rich pay more taxes because they are earning more of the income in America? Yes. There’s no doubt that the share of total income earned by the wealthy has increased steadily over the past 25 years. Since 1980, the share of income earned by the richest 1 percent has more than doubled, from 9 percent to 19 percent. The share of the income going to the poorest income quintile has declined. Income disparities, in absolute dollars, have grown substantially. What is significant is that for the top 5 percent and 10 percent of earners, the ratio of taxes paid compared with income earned has risen. For example, in 1980, the top 10 percent earned 32 percent of the income and paid 44 percent of the taxes—a ratio of 1.4. In 2004, this group earned more of the income (44 percent) but paid a lot more of the taxes (68 percent)—a ratio of 1.6. In other words, progressivity—in terms of share of total taxes paid—has risen. On the other hand, for the top 1 percent of earners, progressivity has declined from a ratio of 2.2 in 1980 to 1.9 in 2004. Lies, damned lies and statistics. The top 1 / 5 / 10 per cent are cornering more and more of the total income (and that income is not just income as in income tax, but all forms of it including the ludicrously low-taxed capital gains) and paying a higher percentage of total taxes. Well, duh! Of course they are, as there is a rapidly diminishing portion of national income for the other 90 / 95 / 99 per cent to pay taxes on. Percentages hide realities. In absolute dollars, the story is way different to what this propaganda piece would have us believe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Percentages hide realities. In absolute dollars, the story is way different to what this propaganda piece would have us believe. I would like to see people, instead of saying I make $X/hr, they should be talking about I make this much a year. It's just another way to be saying the same thing, but looking at the numbers differently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 The CBO claims the Bush tax costs the Treasury about $1.8 trillion over 10 years During 2003, over 450 economists, including 10 Nobel laureates, argued against the Bush 43 tax cuts. Their letter stated: “Passing these tax cuts will worsen the long-term budget outlook, adding to the national projected chronic deficits. This fiscal deterioration will reduce the capacity of the government to finance Social Security and Medicare benefits as well as investments in schools, health, infrastructure, and basic research. Moreover, the proposed tax cuts will generate further inequalities in after-tax income.” Harvard's N. Gregory Mankiw, an economic conservative who served as chairman of Mr. Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, has tested the hypothesis on which Mr. Bush's claim is based: He looked at the extent to which tax cuts stimulate extra growth and the extent to which that growth generates extra tax revenue that offsets the initial loss of revenue from the tax cut. Mr. Mankiw's conclusion: Even over the long term, once you've allowed all of the extra growth to feed through into extra revenue, cuts in capital taxes juice the economy enough to recoup half of the lost revenue, and cuts in income taxes deliver a boost that recoups 17 percent of the lost revenue. So a $100 billion cut in taxes on capital widens the budget deficit by $50 billion, and a $100 billion cut in income taxes widens the budget deficit by $83 billion The Economist estimated the additional federal tax revenue generated from eliminating certain tax deductions, for the 2013-2014 period would reduce the projected deficit at that time by half. But hey, we can just ignore the economic realities of the past 30-40 years, because Harvard has that one study. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 If you would get that sausage out of your mouth for one second... NOBODY is saying that anyone over 200k should not pay taxes - show me one time where someone says that. I am assuming anyone and everyone who is clamoring for broadening the base is clamoring for what you have just shot your load on - broadeing the base would include all of the people you mentioned paying in. Did that big dik bump into your smallish brain??? C'mon man . . .really? You are really adding a lot of class to this duscussio with the childish comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 C'mon man . . .really? You are really adding a lot of class to this duscussio with the childish comments. Seriously? I am ofetn amazed at how you guys throw out these words like childish and childish comments. If you can't comprehend that the sausage thing was a joke and in pure reference to the caption the Michelle Bachman photo then you need to seriously relax. The only thing childish is that a lot you so called adults can't take some tongue in cheek joking - grow up. So let's compare - I throw out some jokes about Bushy being a pole smoking ghey - do I really think he has blown another dude? nope. Compare that to his stupid comments about people making over 100k and not paying any taxes and making it look like people who who are arguing things like broadening the base are actually in favor of those and maybe even promoting more of it. He is obviously smarter than that and just throwing things out there knowing what he is typing is wrong. I will try to hold back on my childish jokes and no Bushy I don't seriously think you are ghey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted August 13, 2011 Share Posted August 13, 2011 Not everyone can figure out how to work the innernets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 But hey, we can just ignore the economic realities of the past 30-40 years, because Harvard has that one study. I would just believe in Bush 100% because he gets all his info from God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 I throw out some jokes about Bushy being a pole smoking ghey - do I really think he has blown another dude? nope. Well now there is no point in me paying for dinner if bushy and I are able to get together this week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gbpfan1231 Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 Well now there is no point in me paying for dinner if bushy and I are able to get together this week. Saved ya some money but please don't horde it - that is evil. 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.