TAXES

[ecaroff]

The top 1% pay over a third, 34.27% of all income taxes. (Up from 2003: 33.71%) The top 5% pay 54.36% of all income taxes (Up from 2002: 53.80%). The top 10% pay 65.84% (Up from 2002: 65.73%). The top 25% pay 83.88% (Down from 2002: 83.90%). The top 50% pay 96.54% (Up from 2002: 96.50%). The bottom 50%? They pay a paltry 3.46% of all income taxes (Down from 2002: 3.50%). The top 1% is paying nearly ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%! And who earns what? The top 1% earns 16.77% of all income (2002: 16.12%). The top 5% earns 31.18% of all the income (2002: 30.55%). The top 10% earns 42.36% of all the income (2002: 41.77%); the top 25% earns 64.86% of all the income (2002: 64.37%) , and the top 50% earns 86.01% (2002: 85.77%) of all the income.

The bottom 50% is paying a tiny bit of the taxes, so you can't give them much of a tax cut by definition. Yet these are the people to whom the Democrats claim to want to give tax cuts. Remember this the next time you hear the "tax cuts for the rich" business. Understand that the so-called rich are about the only ones paying taxes anymore.

[DJofSD]

If the bottom 50% had their taxes raised, I betcha there'd be more people voting.

[46zilzal]

[Remember this the next time you hear the "tax cuts for the rich" business. [b]Understand that the so-called rich are about the only ones paying taxes anymore.
a true ditto head

[ecaroff]

Latest rumor has it that they are going to start increasing taxes on the bettors. If your ticket is a $2 ticket then you're ok, however, any winning ticket that has more than $2 bet you will be paying a surplus tax equal to 1% for every $10 wager. Half of the surplus money raised will be given back to the $2 bettor and the other 1/2 will go into the "tree hugging" fund.

[PaceAdvantage]

a true ditto head

Please try and do better with your replies. This added nothing to the discussion.

[46zilzal]

Please try and do better with your replies. This added nothing to the discussion.
the photo OP was the key to that comment and then the philosphical input was nothing more than an echo of what the fellow in the photo might say, that's all

[PaceAdvantage]

How come nobody ever comments about my avatar? Rush Limbaugh is the only thing that gets your blood running?

Who cares? He's just a guy with a mouth and a mic. Why does he bother you so much? You never hear me commenting about liberal media personalities.....then again, you never really hear ANYONE commenting about liberal media personalities, do you?

[Suff]

I just laugh at sheep.


If You have ALL the money of course you pay the nut.:D Man-o-Man.


I paid 700 a week in federal tax's every week. Scip FICA or 5.75 MA tax.

I took a subway next to guys grossing 600 working the same hours, & just as hard.


Blue line indound, 5:20 AM train. To Goverment Center,Green Line outbound to Kenmmore. 88 bus to Harvard.


If we gave you 100% of the money you'd pay `00% of the nut.

Money Changers In The Temple.

[Suff]

http://www.raken.com/american_wealth/index.asp

[mainardi]

Maybe we could use the old USSR model and go to (pseudo) socialism. That way, the lower 95% of the people could pay 100% of the taxes, while well-connected people with political influence could get away with murder. (Note: these are made up numbers, but no doubt a lot closer to being true than false) Oops, my bad... that's the model that WAS being used in the old CCCP.

I pay my fair share of taxes, and it's nice to know that welfare cheats, 4th generation ADC families, and other assorted tax dodges are one of the main focuses of a certain party... mostly around election time. :rolleyes: :bang:

Not to make too fine a point of it, but small business owners -- the real backbone of this country -- pay quite a bit of taxes, so giving them a tax break gives them a chance to do good by rewarding their employees with more money, so that those people can (in turn) pay more taxes. Not all small businesses do this, but NONE of them would have the opportunity if we "taxed the rich". More than likely, even MORE businesses would be forced to outsource and/or purchase from foreign companies if they became overtaxed, thereby reducing tax generating employees.

BTW, I previously addressed the Dem's "tax the rich" mentality in a different thread... and it is a sad tale for those of you who believe that it's the answer to our tax problems. It would be better if we would: [1] stop forgiving debt to so many foreign countries, [2] cease doing business with communist China, and [3] wean ourselves from reliance on foreign oil. It's too bad that politics keeps getting in the way of common sense. :(

[PaceAdvantage]

I just laugh at sheep.


If You have ALL the money of course you pay the nut.:D Man-o-Man.


I paid 700 a week in federal tax's every week. Scip FICA or 5.75 MA tax.

I took a subway next to guys grossing 600 working the same hours, & just as hard.


Blue line indound, 5:20 AM train. To Goverment Center,Green Line outbound to Kenmmore. 88 bus to Harvard.


If we gave you 100% of the money you'd pay `00% of the nut.

Money Changers In The Temple.



What this country needs is a good ol' proletariat revolution, led by a guy in a beard....whaddya say Suff? How are you with facial hair?

[Sailwolf]

The top 1% pay over a third, 34.27% of all income taxes. (Up from 2003: 33.71%) The top 5% pay 54.36% of all income taxes (Up from 2002: 53.80%). The top 10% pay 65.84% (Up from 2002: 65.73%). The top 25% pay 83.88% (Down from 2002: 83.90%). The top 50% pay 96.54% (Up from 2002: 96.50%). The bottom 50%? They pay a paltry 3.46% of all income taxes (Down from 2002: 3.50%). The top 1% is paying nearly ten times the federal income taxes than the bottom 50%! And who earns what? The top 1% earns 16.77% of all income (2002: 16.12%). The top 5% earns 31.18% of all the income (2002: 30.55%). The top 10% earns 42.36% of all the income (2002: 41.77%); the top 25% earns 64.86% of all the income (2002: 64.37%) , and the top 50% earns 86.01% (2002: 85.77%) of all the income.

The bottom 50% is paying a tiny bit of the taxes, so you can't give them much of a tax cut by definition. Yet these are the people to whom the Democrats claim to want to give tax cuts. Remember this the next time you hear the "tax cuts for the rich" business. Understand that the so-called rich are about the only ones paying taxes anymore.




The richer are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer and the middle class is geting screwed

[Bala]

Sailwolf wrote "The richer are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer and the middle class is geting screwed."

__________________________________________________ ____

The poor are getting poorer????

Define poor. In the poorest zip codes in this country, a great many people
have cars, multipule TVs, vcr, dvd players, ipods and not to mention bling,
bling.

The poorest of the poor have virtually unlimited health care thru medicare.
Walk thru any ghetto in America and what do you see, starving people?
Hardly! Obesity is rampant poor neighborhoods.


I would like to try povery. With abundance of food stamps and health care
we pay people NOT to work.

[Lefty]

sailwolf says: The richer are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer and the middle class is geting screwed
__________________________________________
Actually, some of the former middle class are now among the rich. This is the land of opportunity. And also the land of the whiners.

[ljb]

sailwolf says: The richer are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer and the middle class is geting screwed
__________________________________________
Actually, some of the former middle class are now among the rich. This is the land of opportunity. And also the land of the whiners.
And those that are not among the rich are heading for the poor house. It is the middle class that is getting screwed in this environment and soon they will be dinasours.

[Tom]

Yup. If Bush were wage as severe a war on terrror as he is on the middle class, we would be 100% safe.

I think the idea that this is the land of opportunity is fast going the way of the buggy whip. Many think the economy is thriving, but I believe it is precariously close to a major collpase. The stock market crash in 1929 followed a period of great prosperity.
We cannot sustain the trade imbalance and bleeding of manufacturing jobs and survive. We might lose WWIII without ever firing a shot.

[Lefty]

And those that are not among the rich are heading for the poor house. It is the middle class that is getting screwed in this environment and soon they will be dinasours.
____________
lbj, you copy but ya don't read. A lot of the so-called middleclass will be the millionaires of tom. Anybody heading for the poorhouse are the ones that keep waiting for the rest of us(govt) to take care of them.

[mainardi]

____________
lbj, you copy but ya don't read. A lot of the so-called middleclass will be the millionaires of tom. Anybody heading for the poorhouse are the ones that keep waiting for the rest of us(govt) to take care of them.
I concur. I consider myself middle-class, and as long as I bust my hump -- and don't expect anything to be given to me -- I continue to move in an upward direction. Because I didn't sit around and whine when I found myself unemployed (3 times over my 20+ year career), I work just as hard to find a new job, and every time I come out ahead.

While I do hold out hope that Social Security will be there for me in 11 years, I'm putting my money into 401k, IRA and my daughter's college education funds... and I still have money to gift to the church, go on vacations... stuff that every American has the OPPORTUNITY to do!!!

Nothing is given to us -- enough with the entitlement programs already -- and those that try to make something out their lives most often come out ahead of the game. If people want to disenfranchise themselves, then they should just keep their traps shut and go have a good whine with people of the same persuasion!

[Tom]

____________
lbj, you copy but ya don't read. A lot of the so-called middleclass will be the millionaires of tom. Anybody heading for the poorhouse are the ones that keep waiting for the rest of us(govt) to take care of them.

For crying out loud...you belive THAT??????
you need to get out more - the government is destroying the middle class by breaking it's back, plain and simple, and this BS about the land of opportunity has got to stop. There is no way an economy can support two classes - rich and poor. You make it sound like anyone who is not getting rich is a loser and it is their fault they are poor.
Did you know that Bush has spent over $1.6 BILLION on publicity and advertising to gain public support for his failed policies? Lefty, how in God's name can you justify this much money to make himself look good? Do you know what 1.6 billion dollars would do for people who are trying to raise a family on those McJobs that Bush has created to replace the millions of real jobs he has allowed to go away? What is the conversion formula, 124 mcjobs - 1 real lost job?
This economy is NOT strong and it does not support the middle class.
What about the American dream of honet government?

[Tom]

No, I'm not done yet.

My brother-in-law is self employed, and he has to take care his own helath care. The rates have gone from $7,500 to $10,500 in two years, and his coverage is less than half what it used to be. God help him and my sister if either suffers a serious health problem. And what recourse does he have? Meanwhile, he pays taxes to provide Bush and company with world-class healthcare. He puts in 12-14 hour days 6 days a week now. He is a ferrier, so he travels everywhere inhis truck. A truck he needs to replace every two years because of wear and tear. And the cost of gasoline has just about broken him.
So tell me, Lefty, is it his fault if he goes bankrupt - just another slug waitnig for a government hand out?
Oh, and like the vast majority of American today, based on recent government statistics, he is NOT putting away any savings. Nothing left to save.
So what do we do with these millions of people who are going to retire with nothing? $1.6 billion for advertising and tax relief for oil companies making record billions in profits. Is this what you call the American way?

[Lefty]

Tom, you mean his trbles just started with the Bush adm? Do YOU honestly blve that? Healthcare in this country has skyrocketed because the govt is involved in it. There is no free mkt in healthcare. But everytime anything rational is suggested by Repubs, the Dems cry it won't work. It's all negativety with them. If we'd instituted health savings prgms 20 yrs ago healthcare would be healthier. Pun intended. If we don't do it now, more and more individuals and small business' will struggle. Yet there will be middle class individuals that rise to the top of the heap DESPITE the probs.
I stand by my statement. More millionaires are created every yr. Where do they come from? Let's say it together: They come from the middle class!

[Tom]

And we are creating many poor people, too - from the middle class.

You make it sound like anyone that can't make it anymore is at fault themselves. And it did not start with the Bush administration - but he is to doing anyhting meaningful to change it, either. In fact, he just made it worse wtih thiws CAFTA crap - which hurts American workers. FREE trade is no good for us - unless you consider competing wtih slave labor a good thing. FAIR trade is what we need, and Bush is totally ignoring the unfair trade practices facing us.

[Lefty]

Tom, you better study what happened to the Japanese economy when they tried protectionism.

[ljb]

I concur. I consider myself middle-class, and as long as I bust my hump -- and don't expect anything to be given to me -- I continue to move in an upward direction. Because I didn't sit around and whine when I found myself unemployed (3 times over my 20+ year career), I work just as hard to find a new job, and every time I come out ahead.

While I do hold out hope that Social Security will be there for me in 11 years, I'm putting my money into 401k, IRA and my daughter's college education funds... and I still have money to gift to the church, go on vacations... stuff that every American has the OPPORTUNITY to do!!!

Nothing is given to us -- enough with the entitlement programs already -- and those that try to make something out their lives most often come out ahead of the game. If people want to disenfranchise themselves, then they should just keep their traps shut and go have a good whine with people of the same persuasion!
I am not talking about entitlement programs I am talking about taking insurance coverage away from people who worked their whole life for a company with the understanding that part of their retirement package included insurance. You have 11 years to go you better hope the college tuition and medical expenses stop increasing soon or you will be working for the` rest of your life.

[mainardi]

I am not talking about entitlement programs I am talking about taking insurance coverage away from people who worked their whole life for a company with the understanding that part of their retirement package included insurance. You have 11 years to go you better hope the college tuition and medical expenses stop increasing soon or you will be working for the` rest of your life.
Agreed... with a caveat. The government DOES NOT take away retirement insurance, and they have no control of it either. It is the individual companies that choose to cut the benefits... and they do so to make the stockholders happy because they don't know how to manage effectively. If you want to say that we should not give tax breaks to CORPORATIONS (as opposed to individual "rich people"), THEN you get my concurrence.

As for me, I don't have any illusions about a retirement package... THAT'S why I am investing in retirement funds, with a plan to pay for my own coverage until Medicare kicks in. Oh yeah, and my daughter can get student loans and apply for grants and scholarships -- just like I did -- if what I'm saving for her doesn't cut it.

[mainardi]

My brother-in-law is self employed, and he has to take care his own helath care. The rates have gone from $7,500 to $10,500 in two years, and his coverage is less than half what it used to be. God help him and my sister if either suffers a serious health problem. And what recourse does he have? Meanwhile, he pays taxes to provide Bush and company with world-class healthcare. He puts in 12-14 hour days 6 days a week now. He is a ferrier, so he travels everywhere inhis truck. A truck he needs to replace every two years because of wear and tear. And the cost of gasoline has just about broken him.
So tell me, Lefty, is it his fault if he goes bankrupt - just another slug waitnig for a government hand out?
Oh, and like the vast majority of American today, based on recent government statistics, he is NOT putting away any savings. Nothing left to save.
So what do we do with these millions of people who are going to retire with nothing? $1.6 billion for advertising and tax relief for oil companies making record billions in profits. Is this what you call the American way?
So... has your brother-in-law considered giving up the "self-employment" grind? While being self-employed can provide personal benefits, it kind of sounds like he's reached the point where he NEEDS to join the rest of us in working for someone else... it may not be what he WANTS to do, but sometimes you have to give up the dried-up fishing hole and move on.

As for Americans failing to save, you DO REALIZE that investments in retirement funds DO NOT count towards the savings numbers? And failing to save also happens due to people living beyond their means... and THAT is not the fault of the taxation system currently in place. Just like "betting with your head and not over it", some folks should take the same approach with personal spending. As Dirty Harry said, "A man's got to know his limitations." Just remember, poor people don't have many choices, but people in the middle class CAN and SHOULD do a better job of not "spending like the Rockefellers".

Look, my wife and I can easily save well over $2000 a month, just by living well within our means... of course, I choose to maintain an older van instead of coughing up $400-$500 to lease a Tahoe and impress my neighbors... AND we didn't listen to all the home sellers -- agents, brokers and such -- that told us we could buy twice as much house as what we needed. Americans could show a little restraint once in a while, and to make this a Presidential issue is just off base.

Also, understand that your "Bush and company" reference applies to all Presidents -- past and present -- and their "company", so your arguement isn't very compelling. FYI, the Legislative branch -- made up of both major parties -- gets those same perks, so it might be a good idea to save your vitriol for a better supported subject.

And you can might want to reconsider blaming Bush for the oil company rebates... I started a thread on that very subject yesterday, if you need some clarification on WHICH PRESIDENT signed the bill (hint: it was 1995) and HOW POORLY it was written and WHICH PRESIDENT didn't veto it.

[Indulto]

JM,

I agree with much of what you’ve said, but I also agree with Tom’s contention that many people willing to work -- as hard as necessary -- to share the American dream cannot do so. Older workers and those with health complications are no longer competitive in a society where businesses are placed at a disadvantage if they do not pursue maximum productivity by hiring younger employees with more recent training (and who are more trainable) as well as the energy, time, and lack of sophistication/organization to willingly work longer with less compensation and requirements/demands for benefits.

Many horseplayers here seem willing to attribute good fortune (racing luck?) as well as handicapping ability to their success at the windows, but some self-proclaimed “self -made” individuals would never acknowledge that luck had anything to do with it, and will always insist that “being in the right place at the right time” is simply a function of proper planning.

No one contests that fraud is a serious problem in entitlement programs and health-care delivery. I can’t see how anything other than corruption can explain why it continues along with our failure to win the “war on drugs.” Yet, instead of supporting efforts to correct the misuse of funds, this group blocks delivery of assistance to those truly in need while it contributes obscene amounts to fuel the electioneering and political influence industries, and then denies any possibility that joblessness is a built-in function of both unrestrained, unregulated capitalism and stock manipulation.

I agree that these problems were not addressed in recent previous administrations, but for me, W will always stand for “windfall” profits and “war”. Is the latter this administration’s version of the New Deals’s C.C.C.? Do any other government jobs offer any escape from the ghettos or welfare? What good are jobs training programs when there are few jobs or even realistic opportunities in the private sector for those with any bumps in their education, employment, credit, medical, or societal backgrounds? Does anybody believe that the term “affordable housing” is NOT an oxymoron for all but the wealthy?

Tom’s statement “What they do to Sec, they do to me” is even more relevant in an economic context than it was politically. If we don’t watch out for others, who will watch out for us? Do we go back in time to when people had lots of children in the hope they would be cared for in their old age?

BTW, Tom, as far as I can tell, nobody does to Sec what you do to Sec. LOL!

[Tom]

Tom, you better study what happened to the Japanese economy when they tried protectionism.
I don't have to - I can see what is happening to ours when we throw around stupic terms that do not refelct reality. Is it protectionist to demand FAIR trade, to demand china not abuse currency valuations, not allow and encourage copywrite violations, to insist that American companies not have to contribute technology as a cost of doing business over there?

[mainardi]

I don't have to - I can see what is happening to ours when we throw around stupic terms that do not refelct reality. Is it protectionist to demand FAIR trade, to demand china not abuse currency valuations, not allow and encourage copywrite violations, to insist that American companies not have to contribute technology as a cost of doing business over there?
I agree on China. For a COMMUNIST country, we sure do spend a lot of American money trying to get them to loosen their purse strings... and it seems like if we can figure out that they're just playing us for chumps... oh, never mind... I forgot that we're talking about the blind eye that extreme capitalism turns when money MIGHT be made. The "big-3" automakers have long been touting China as the next big buyer of their vehicles... except for the simple fact that most Americans can't afford to buy a car (leasing is a whole 'nother problem), let alone Chinese people.

Now, we outsource parts to China all the time. Heck, they already have a big enough chunk of our money... almost enough for their national oil company (CNOOC) to BUY Unocal. Are American corporations so superficial that they can't follow the bouncing ball? Seems to be the case... better brush up on your Chinese... don't forget to ask them what dialect they are going to expect us to converse in!

[Tom]

Joe, I only know two chinnese words: Bang! and Boom! :eek: