AP: Half of U.S. pays no federal income tax

[Foxfyre]

What does it matter whether non taxpayers increased niore under Clinton or Bush or Obama? How does that in any way affect the problem of half the population paying little or no federal income taxes?

It matters because it is a CON$ervative template that the Dems are deliberately creating a voting bloc for themselves of non-paying voters. If that is true what does that say about the stupidity of the GOP to accelerate the process? That's even more telling than the deficit spending under the GOP when they run on small gov and spending cuts!

Don't you CON$ ever get tired of being lied to and used by the GOP????

What difference does it make if it is a 'conservative' or 'liberal' template? What difference does it make WHO was stupid or not? What difference does it make WHO came up with a good idea? Or a bad idea? Does that change whether the idea was good or bad?

How does partisan slogans or hackery or initiatives or stupidity or brilliance or anything else change in any way the problems inherent in half the population paying little or nothing in federal income taxes?

 

[edthecynic]

What does it matter whether non taxpayers increased niore under Clinton or Bush or Obama? How does that in any way affect the problem of half the population paying little or no federal income taxes?

It matters because it is a CON$ervative template that the Dems are deliberately creating a voting bloc for themselves of non-paying voters. If that is true what does that say about the stupidity of the GOP to accelerate the process? That's even more telling than the deficit spending under the GOP when they run on small gov and spending cuts!

Don't you CON$ ever get tired of being lied to and used by the GOP????

What difference does it make if it is a 'conservative' or 'liberal' template? What difference does it make WHO was stupid or not? What difference does it make WHO came up with a good idea? Or a bad idea? Does that change whether the idea was good or bad?

How does partisan slogans or hackery or initiatives or stupidity or brilliance or anything else change in any way the problems inherent in half the population paying little or nothing in federal income taxes?

Apparently it's important to CON$ as it's been a mantra of theirs to attack Dems with for years and there are some people who think we should "miss yet" the person WHO doubled the rate of increase in non-payers!

I ask you, could we count on a voter who misses the person who doubled the growth rate of non-payers to make a more informed vote this time around???

 

[edthecynic]

Obama has more of the tax base being paid by less of the people.. more than any time in history

1)they argued for tax cuts and we got tax cuts

We did?

Where? When?

You mean the little extra 20 bucks a week? That wasn't a tax cut, it was a deferment, a change in your withholding. You still owe the same amount April 15 because the tax tables weren't changed.

The "Obama tax cut" is a LIE.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Tax exemptions/deductions/credits for having children are the main reason so many American families pay no federal income taxes.

Not to mention lower incomes, etc

Children make the big difference.

 

[Foxfyre]

It matters because it is a CON$ervative template that the Dems are deliberately creating a voting bloc for themselves of non-paying voters. If that is true what does that say about the stupidity of the GOP to accelerate the process? That's even more telling than the deficit spending under the GOP when they run on small gov and spending cuts!

Don't you CON$ ever get tired of being lied to and used by the GOP????

What difference does it make if it is a 'conservative' or 'liberal' template? What difference does it make WHO was stupid or not? What difference does it make WHO came up with a good idea? Or a bad idea? Does that change whether the idea was good or bad?

How does partisan slogans or hackery or initiatives or stupidity or brilliance or anything else change in any way the problems inherent in half the population paying little or nothing in federal income taxes?

Apparently it's important to CON$ as it's been a mantra of theirs to attack Dems with for years and there are some people who think we should "miss yet" the person WHO doubled the rate of increase in non-payers!

I ask you, could we count on a voter who misses the person who doubled the growth rate of non-payers to make a more informed vote this time around???

There's no question that some people vote stupidly. Enough people voted for Obama to elect him didn't they? And some who vote for the wrong person do so with the best of intentions believing they are getting somebody different than what they get.

And that does not factor in the problem in any way.

The issue is whether it is a healthy thing or an unhealthy thing for half the people bearing no consequences for tax policy that affects the other half. And the issue applies whether it is President Bush in office or President Obama in office.

I wonder if somebody like you could take the partisanship venom out of it just long enough to focus on that issue? I am guessing not, but I am an eternal optimist.

 

[DiamondDave]

Tax exemptions/deductions/credits for having children are the main reason so many American families pay no federal income taxes.

Not to mention lower incomes, etc

Children make the big difference.

I have children... my best friend has children.. my neighbor has children.. my brother has children.. my sister has children... and we all pay income taxes.... now my other brother is a pothead piece of scumbag shit who barely earns enough to get by, he does not pay income taxes and the sorry sack of shit leeches off the system... funny.. it's about the income, not the kids

 

[DiamondDave]

The number of non-payers was on its way down Clinton's last year so you can't claim it was Clinton's inertia that caused the number of non-payers to increase Bush's first year.

Again from the right-wing taxpayer foundation:

And let's have you try and change the subject again

Clinton went down .4% in his last year and he was up all together in his 8... and again.. nobody said there was not an increase under Bush.. and you don't see me defending him... I am arguing against your false and blatantly made up numbers... your double standard as evidenced in your 'inertia' post and your all around bullshit... you try to use the inertia of a policy in the tax cuts but refuse to use the same with Clinton's child deduction changes

You're grasping at straws.. quit while you are behind.. you've been bitch slapped enough

While you might not be denying the non-payers increased under Bush, you are trying to downplay it and equate the increase in non-payers to a Dem plot to get voters when the evidence is the rate grew most under BUSH. Under Clinton it went up 5.2% over all 8 years even though it was heading down his last year but under Bush it went up 11.1% over 8 years, more than double the rate of Clinton, and 3.7% in Bush's last year alone!
That is definitely inertia!

And in your inertia game.. Obammy Salami better look out... he raised it about as much as Bush did in 8 years in less than 2 years... ooooohhhh inertia oooooooooooooooooohhhhh ahhhhhhh

You've been bitch slapped and caught in your lies repeatedly and you're looking for any distraction to weasel out....

Go try and use more made up numbers and stats against some mongoloid drunkard, they might actually believe you..

 

[PatekPhilippe]

I pay about 4 times what a person with a couple kids pays. Same wage level.

So shut up, genius.

You are in fact right...I am a genius....unlike you I have write offs and don't pay 4 times what a person with a couple kids pays. It's dummies like you who are too fucking stupid to take advantage of our tax laws who are calling for the rich to pay more...when in fact if their marginal rate is raised they will simply move their money off shore.

You are full of shit. And earn a neg rep for lying about me.

You are full of shit...AND...a stupid fuck for not having any write-offs...I have reciprocated with neg rep because you have earned it.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Tax exemptions/deductions/credits for having children are the main reason so many American families pay no federal income taxes.

Not to mention lower incomes, etc

Children make the big difference.

Funny how nycarbineer is bitching and complaining about Democrat sponsored laws that allowed the generous exemptions for kids. What's wrong? Impotent...sterile...chicken shit around women...40 year old virgin...closet gay?

 

[edthecynic]

Not to mention lower incomes, etc

Children make the big difference.

Funny how nycarbineer is bitching and complaining about Democrat sponsored laws that allowed the generous exemptions for kids. What's wrong? Impotent...sterile...chicken shit around women...40 year old virgin...closet gay?

See the first quote in my sig!

The child tax exemption was introduced in 1997 sponsored in the house by John Kasich REPUBLICAN and in the senate by Frank Murkowski REPUBLICAN.

Lie .... er .... er .... try again.

 

[Murf76]

I think it's fairly obvious that both parties have engaged in social engineering. It's not so much a party problem as it is a politician problem.... and the reason why a firm line must be drawn between the treasury and political bribery.

We've reached the tipping point, where the weasels in Washington have managed to negate federal income taxation for 47% of the population. And lest we wring our hands too much in pity for the poor... let's remember that these greasy politicos are wresting away a certain amount of freedom from people when they subjugate them politically. Just because you make under $51,000 doesn't mean your voice shouldn't be full-throated, that you shouldn't be free to vote for whoever you like best or that you should allow your choice to be made for you because you're beholden financially or might profit financially.

Vote-buying is a transaction, not a gift, which puts the voter in a position of gratitude instead of in control. You can't be the boss *and* be a child. It circumvents the authority of the sovereign citizen when he's forced to vote a certain way in order to preserve his self-interest. It dilutes the power of the vote and demeans the citizen who casts it to the point where just yesterday, Barack Obama, claimed that people should be THANKING HIM.

Unbelievable. He's usurped our liberties, spent us to near certain bankruptcy, and INSANELY believes we should be happy about it. In ten years time, the interest on the debt alone will be a trillion dollars ANNUALLY, and from his ivory tower, he thinks we should be bowing and scraping in humble gratitude.

And really folks, THAT's the plan. It's how sovereign citizens are sorted into politically useful voting blocs.



The Bush Tax Cuts, which have been bandied back and forth in such ferocity on this thread, are irrelevant in terms of causing the 47% problem. They're just not that big.

Obama has always been happy to boast that he'll let the Bush tax cuts on high-end earners expire at the end of this year. This blow for justice will initially generate all of about $40 billion annually, or only about 5 percent of the cost of Obama's stimulus bill. Over 10 years, it will raise almost $700 billion, or only enough to cover about half of the budget deficit this year alone.

(more...)

Read more: Tax hikes forever - NYPOST.com

In other words, repeal of the Bush Tax Cuts won't even cover one year's worth of our annual interest on the debt by 2020.... and will NOT rectify the 47% problem.

Over the past 15 years, politicians have been working overtime to create a blizzard of tax credits targeted to "help" the so-called "middle class."

They've created the child credit, which is different from the child care tax credit, unless you have a grown child and then you can use the education credit. And if you don't have a child, then you can get one using the adoption credit. If you don't care for a child, there's the credit for caring for granny instead.

But if you'd rather care for air than people, there's a credit for buying a hybrid vehicle, unless you'd rather put a solar panel on your roof, or simply replace all the windows in your house. Oh, don't have a house? Then there is the first-time homebuyer's credit.

The consequence of turning the tax code into a tool for social policy is that we now have a record 52 million filers off the income tax rolls. This means 36 percent of all so-called taxpayers actually pay zero in income taxes after taking their credits and deductions. But these figures don't include some 15 million people who work but don't earn enough to file a tax return. When these people are added to the non-payers, estimates the Tax Policy Center, the percentage of households who don't pay income taxes rises to 47 percent.

(more...)
Why more Americans pay no income tax - CNN.com

The problem is POLITICAL PANDERING... and they all do it.

The solution... is to remove this Congress and install one who will reform the tax code, either by going to a flat tax without exemptions or to the FAIR tax without exemptions. (Although I do note that some of you had earlier concerns about the FAIR tax; concerns regarding the poor which I shared until last night when I heard Neil Boortz explaining the prebate system on Stossel. I'm not fully sold... but it most certainly does appear to peel the sticky fingers of Congress off of the tax code.)

 

[Murf76]

Tax exemptions/deductions/credits for having children are the main reason so many American families pay no federal income taxes.

While I wouldn't say that they're the "main reason"... they're certainly a part of it.

But lets just take a look into the crystal ball of nanny-statism and see where this sort of social engineering leads, shall we?

The Davey family's £815-a-week state handouts pay for a four-bedroom home, top-of-the-range mod cons and two vehicles including a Mercedes people carrier.

Father-of-seven Peter gave up work because he could make more living on benefits.

Yet he and his wife Claire are still not happy with their lot.

With an eighth child on the way, they are demanding a bigger house, courtesy of the taxpayer.

<snip>

With their income of more than £42,000 a year, they run an 11-seater minibus and the seven-seat automatic Mercedes.

But according to the Daveys they have nothing to be thankful for.

'It doesn't bother me that taxpayers are paying for me to have a large family,' added Mrs Davey.

'We couldn't afford to care for our children without benefits, but as long as they have everything they need, I don't think I'm selfish.

'Most of the parents at our kids' school are on benefits.'

She added: 'I don't feel bad about being subsidised by people who are working. I'm just working with the system that's there.

<snip>

Mrs Davey, who spends £160 a week at Tesco, says she does not intend to stop at eight children. Her target is 14.

And she adds: 'I've always wanted a big family - no one can tell me how many kids I can have whether I'm working or not.'

<snip>


Read more: Peter Davey gets £42,000 in benefits a year and drives a Mercedes | Mail Online

Yup. No one can tell HER how many kids she can afford. She doesn't have to pay the bill. She's "entitled" to live beyond her means and the taxpayers can just suck it up. She wants what she wants when she wants it... and by God, doesn't she have a "right" to do as she pleases regardless of who else might have to pay for her choices?

 

[Care4all]

You are in fact right...I am a genius....unlike you I have write offs and don't pay 4 times what a person with a couple kids pays. It's dummies like you who are too fucking stupid to take advantage of our tax laws who are calling for the rich to pay more...when in fact if their marginal rate is raised they will simply move their money off shore.

You are full of shit. And earn a neg rep for lying about me.

You are full of shit...AND...a stupid fuck for not having any write-offs...I have reciprocated with neg rep because you have earned it.

First- Almost 60% of all tax payers filing their income taxes, USE THE SHORT FORM.....they get to take NO itemized DEDUCTIONS....so those of you that can take advantage of the various credits and deductions allowed, you are in the minority.....

Second- Matthew and I file short form, no itemized deductions because we OWN our home outright, there is no mortgage interest to deduct....now you tell me, who is REALLY in better financial straits? the person who gets to deduct a couple of thousand a month to the bank in interest payments for their mortgage from their earned income, or the person who has no mortgage at all and owns their home, and gets to keep all of their income?

I guess it is in the eye of the beholder on that one!

 

[NYcarbineer]

Not to mention lower incomes, etc

Children make the big difference.

Funny how nycarbineer is bitching and complaining about Democrat sponsored laws that allowed the generous exemptions for kids. What's wrong? Impotent...sterile...chicken shit around women...40 year old virgin...closet gay?

The 1000 dollar child tax credit was passed under Bush. You don't know what you're talking about.
It's one of the biggest reasons moderate to low income families pay no income taxes.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Not to mention lower incomes, etc

Children make the big difference.

I have children... my best friend has children.. my neighbor has children.. my brother has children.. my sister has children... and we all pay income taxes.... now my other brother is a pothead piece of scumbag shit who barely earns enough to get by, he does not pay income taxes and the sorry sack of shit leeches off the system... funny.. it's about the income, not the kids

You are wrong. The $1000 child tax credit, which OBVIOUSLY taxpayers without kids don't get, takes 1000 bucks per child (with rules and limitations) right off the top of parents' tax bill. You make what I make, you got a couple kids, you pay 2000 less in taxes than I do. Not to mention the many other child related tax reductions that you are entitled to.

It's an indisputable fact. I don't know why you're trying to dispute it.

Oh yes, I do, because people with children and getting massive tax breaks because of them look somewhat silly trying to argue that their taxes are too high.

 

[DiamondDave]

Children make the big difference.

I have children... my best friend has children.. my neighbor has children.. my brother has children.. my sister has children... and we all pay income taxes.... now my other brother is a pothead piece of scumbag shit who barely earns enough to get by, he does not pay income taxes and the sorry sack of shit leeches off the system... funny.. it's about the income, not the kids

You are wrong. The $1000 child tax credit, which OBVIOUSLY taxpayers without kids don't get, takes 1000 bucks per child (with rules and limitations) right off the top of parents' tax bill. You make what I make, you got a couple kids, you pay 2000 less in taxes than I do. Not to mention the many other child related tax reductions that you are entitled to.

It's an indisputable fact. I don't know why you're trying to dispute it.

Oh yes, I do, because people with children and getting massive tax breaks because of them look somewhat silly trying to argue that their taxes are too high.

Yep... but your ASSumption that children are what is making the difference is absurd... it is the income level being taxed or not taxed that is the major reason

I am not disputing that there are child deductions... I am disputing your conclusion

 

[NYcarbineer]

I have children... my best friend has children.. my neighbor has children.. my brother has children.. my sister has children... and we all pay income taxes.... now my other brother is a pothead piece of scumbag shit who barely earns enough to get by, he does not pay income taxes and the sorry sack of shit leeches off the system... funny.. it's about the income, not the kids

You are wrong. The $1000 child tax credit, which OBVIOUSLY taxpayers without kids don't get, takes 1000 bucks per child (with rules and limitations) right off the top of parents' tax bill. You make what I make, you got a couple kids, you pay 2000 less in taxes than I do. Not to mention the many other child related tax reductions that you are entitled to.

It's an indisputable fact. I don't know why you're trying to dispute it.

Oh yes, I do, because people with children and getting massive tax breaks because of them look somewhat silly trying to argue that their taxes are too high.

Yep... but your ASSumption that children are what is making the difference is absurd... it is the income level being taxed or not taxed that is the major reason

I am not disputing that there are child deductions... I am disputing your conclusion

An approximate 3 thousand dollar difference in tax liability for 2 middle income people making exactly the same amount of money, except one has 2 kids and the other has none, is a HUGE difference is it not?

Do you understand how brackets work? Do you understand that it's only the money IN THE BRACKET that is taxed at the rate of that bracket?

 

[Misty]

Tax exemptions/deductions/credits for having children are the main reason so many American families pay no federal income taxes.

Not to mention lower incomes, etc

Children make the big difference.

children can only be deducted if you make UNDER a certain amount. Once you reach the magic number, you can no longer deduct children.

And children cost money.

 

[Misty]

There is a sect of income earners, the 250k range, that get really screwed. They are too rich to not pay taxes and they are too poor to find anything to deduct.

 

[Misty]

The people with kids aren't getting any deals. If the do get to deduct them it isn't enough to justify having more of them

They cost money, clothing, which is taxed, driving them around which takes gas, which is taxed, feeding them, providng healthcare for them etc