|
0 members (),
4
guests, and
3
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums59
Topics17,122
Posts314,324
Members6,305
| |
Most Online294
Dec 6th, 2017
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 18,003 Likes: 191
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
|
Moderator Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 18,003 Likes: 191 |
I have to echo Steve's observation. Whenever someone wants to distort the tax discussion to allege that the rich are paying "their fair share" or more of the tax burden, they start with asserting something like "The nearby chart shows that the top 1% of taxpayers, those who earn above $388,806, paid 40% of all income taxes in 2006, the highest share in at least 40 years." Here's how deceptive these comments actually are: First, by lumping all of those in the top 1% together, it deliberately skews the numbers, because those in the top half of that percent earn considerably more than those barely in the top 1%. It helps further to blend it down to the top 10%, as the article does, by further obscuring the actual numbers. Second, notice how they only talk about % of total income, not actual tax rates? That is because as a percentage of income those below the top thresholds pay a much larger percentage of income in taxes than those in the top 10% and higher. Those who make less than $100,000 a year earn nearly all of that income from wages, which are taxed not only as income taxes, but also for Social Security. So, for example, my real income tax rate is over 41% (income tax at 28% plus 12.6% for FICA and additionally Medicare taxes (don't know the percentage). Whereas, those earning over $1 million in compensation earn the bulk of that "income" in the form of stock options and other compensation "packages" that allow deferral into tax-exempt or tax-reduced forms. For example, the executives at Bear Stearns: Over five years, from 2002 through 2006, Cayne took home total compensation — salary, bonus, restricted stock, and stock options — worth a combined $156 million. Current CEO Schwartz made $141 million. Former Co-President Warren Spector, deposed after the hedge fund debacle, did the best of them all, reaping $168 million. Now the key here is that they received the bulk of these bonuses as "stock options" for which they did not pay present taxes, but deferred paying on, and then paid only capital gains rates (15%) when they sold off that stock and reinvested it - again leveraging the tax code to reduce their tax burden. Executive compensation - wikipedia So, where I earn 90% of my income from wages and pay 41% in taxes, they earn 90% of their income from capital gains and pay only 15%. Hmmmm... seems "fair" to me! Addendum[As of 2001] In terms of types of financial wealth, the top one percent of households have 44.1% of all privately held stock, 58.0% of financial securities, and 57.3% of business equity. The top 10% have 85% to 90% of stock, bonds, trust funds, and business equity, and over 75% of non-home real estate. Since financial wealth is what counts as far as the control of income-producing assets, we can say that just 10% of the people own the United States of America.
Last edited by NW Ponderer; 07/21/08 04:33 PM. Reason: Additional information and citation
A well reasoned argument is like a diamond: impervious to corruption and crystal clear - and infinitely rarer.
Here, as elsewhere, people are outraged at what feels like a rigged game -- an economy that won't respond, a democracy that won't listen, and a financial sector that holds all the cards. - Robert Reich
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 268
newbie
|
|
newbie
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 268 |
The last paragraph in the article reads: If Mr. Obama does succeed in raising tax rates on the rich, we'd also wager that the rich share of tax payments would fall. The last time tax rates were as high as the Senator wants them -- the Carter years -- the rich paid only 19% of all income taxes, half of the 40% share they pay today. Why? Because they either worked less, earned less, or they found ways to shelter income from taxes so it was never reported to the IRS as income. So are you saying that the wealthy are not presently finding ways to shelter income from taxes so it is never reported as income?  The way to soak the rich is with low tax rates, and last week's IRS data provide more powerful validation of that proposition.  Actually, a paragraph consists of three or more sentences. 
Every true believer is someone else's heretic.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 15,646
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 15,646 |
Here's a chart that gives a better picture of what we're talking about when we say "the bottom 50%". It shows that 66.4 million Americans earned a total of (about) $1 trillion, in other words the AVERAGE income of the bottom 50% - one half of all Americans who earn a living - is $15,060 annually. These are the people who paid only 3% of all income taxes collected. Now that, my friends, is a travesty: that people who earn so little money should have to shell out any of it to support the various Federal projects (such as wars) that enrich those top 1%. Notice on this chart that those top 1% earners make AT LEAST $402,000 annually, and their AVERAGE income is about $750,000 per year, or FIFTY times the income of the Average person in the lower 50%. And yet they pay only TWELVE times the proportion of their income in taxes. Let's look at that again. Fifty times as much income, twelve times the proportion of their income in taxes. Shall we explore the proportions of disposable income next? Hey, when it comes to manipulating data, the WSJ ain't got nuthin' on me!
Steve Give us the wisdom to teach our children to love,
to respect and be kind to one another,
so that we may grow with peace in mind.
(Native American prayer)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 405
newbie
|
|
OP
newbie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 405 |
Actually, a paragraph consists of three or more sentences. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,010
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,010 |
What is a "fair share" of our national tax bill. I would argue for a flat tax. Not the usual sort of flat tax. I suggest a really "fair" flat tax. Everyone pays exactly the same amount of tax. You take the national budget, divide by 300 million residents... and you have your tax bill. What could be more fair than that?
"It's not a lie if you believe it." -- George Costanza
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves. --Bertrand Russel
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 405
newbie
|
|
OP
newbie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 405 |
What is a "fair share" of our national tax bill. I would argue for a flat tax. Not the usual sort of flat tax. I suggest a really "fair" flat tax. Everyone pays exactly the same amount of tax. You take the national budget, divide by 300 million residents... and you have your tax bill. What could be more fair than that?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 15,646
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 15,646 |
Preconceived notion without supporting evidence.
Steve Give us the wisdom to teach our children to love,
to respect and be kind to one another,
so that we may grow with peace in mind.
(Native American prayer)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,010
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,010 |
What is a "fair share" of our national tax bill. I would argue for a flat tax. Not the usual sort of flat tax. I suggest a really "fair" flat tax. Everyone pays exactly the same amount of tax. You take the national budget, divide by 300 million residents... and you have your tax bill. What could be more fair than that? There would still be a corporate tax too. Each corporation would pay the same dollar amount as any other person.... it is only fair
"It's not a lie if you believe it." -- George Costanza
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves. --Bertrand Russel
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,010
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 12,010 |
So, in order for the tax system to be really fair, each man woman and child would need to pay about $10,000 each.
The problem I see, is that there would likely be more than a few slackers who would not pay their tax. Now, I do not want to pay extra to pay their tax... so what do we do with these people?
"It's not a lie if you believe it." -- George Costanza
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves. --Bertrand Russel
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 405
newbie
|
|
OP
newbie
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 405 |
Here's a chart that gives a better picture of what we're talking about when we say "the bottom 50%". It shows that 66.4 million Americans earned a total of (about) $1 trillion, in other words the AVERAGE income of the bottom 50% - one half of all Americans who earn a living - is $15,060 annually. These are the people who paid only 3% of all income taxes collected. Now that, my friends, is a travesty: that people who earn so little money should have to shell out any of it to support the various Federal projects (such as wars) that enrich those top 1%.[snip] Finally, in 2004, much more money was returned to low-income earners through the tax code via programs like the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and the Refundable Child Tax Credit than in 2000. Table 1 shows that among lower- and middle-income groups, many taxpayers receive more back from the IRS than they actually pay in federal income taxes. Every AGI group up to $25,000 actually receives more back from the IRS in the aggregate than it pays in federal income taxes. 
|
|
|
|
|
