DemoRATS have now declared political civil war....

[francoHFW]

By now, even you should realize that I am never wrong.

I thought I was once, but I was mistaken.



"Top 3% of U.S. Taxpayers Paid Majority of Income Taxes in 2016

(Bloomberg) -- Individual income taxes are the federal government’s single biggest revenue source. In fiscal year 2018, which ended Sept. 30, the individual income tax is expected to bring in roughly $1.7 trillion, or about half of all federal revenues, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

If past statistics can offer any guidance, in 2016, $1.44 trillion income taxes were paid by 140.9 million taxpayers reporting a total of $10.2 trillion in adjusted gross income, according to data recently released by the Internal Revenue Services.

Bloomberg looked into the 2016 individual returns data in detail for some additional insights illustrated in the charts below:

· The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (37.3 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (30.5 percent).

· The top 50 percent of all taxpayers paid 97 percent of total individual income taxes.

· In other words, the bottom 50 percent paid 3 percent. Which small percentile of tax payers also paid 3 percent or more? You might have guessed it. It is the top 0.001%, or about 1,400 taxpayers. That group alone paid 3.25 percent of all income taxes. In 2001, the bottom 50 percent paid nearly 5 percent whereas the top 0.001 percent of filers paid 2.3 percent of income taxes."
Top 3% of U.S. Taxpayers Paid Majority of Income Tax in 2016

1. If the Leftist is interested in a more ‘fair’ redistribution of wealth, let him vote for lower taxes, and then he can distribute his now larger share of his wealth to the lesser compensated folks.
   1. Illustrative of reality is the fact that the Leftist refrains from paying above the stated price for goods and services…he wants, as everyone else does, competition between said services. Only then does he stand a chance of getting a “fair” price. In his own enterprise, he strives to improve quality or lower price…’else his potential customers will take their business to others. Unless he has the power of government!
   2. “Just for fun, find a Marxist professor- who scoffs at the idea that people work less if they lose the incentive of money- how he would feel if his name were not put on the academic articles he published. Instead the articles would be published under the name of another academic who needed the recognition more than he did. After all…he would still have the satisfaction of having written the articles….His completely reasonable response would be that he earned’ the right to have his name on those articles, and denying him that measure of earned success is viciously unfair. Exactly.” Arthur Brooks, “The Road to Freedom,” p. 26.

yes you are baffled by b******* about federal income taxes, our only progressive tags, and which is getting to be smaller and smaller as percentage of the overall tax bite.
and that's dear is why we don't have enough money to invest in our infrastructure and people. So we are losing the competition. No matter how many $7 jobs there are....

How could I be the one who is baffled, when I just taught you a lesson?


Not only don't the bottom 50% pay taxes, but Republicans have seen to it that the working poor get a tax benefit....

1. The EITC has a sterling Republican heritage. It was first instituted in the 1920s by a Republican Congress at the instigation of Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon. Repealed in 1943, Republican President Gerald Ford revived it in 1975.
   1. EITC supporters argued that because the credit would be available only to those with earned income, it would reinforce work incentives and help get people off welfare. By making the credit refundable, it would offset the disincentive effects of higher payroll tax rates, which had risen from 4.8 percent on workers and employers in 1970 to 5.85 percent in 1975.
2. In the 1980s, Ronald Reagan supported a big increase in the EITC rate from 10 percent to 14 percent. In 1990, George H.W. Bush supported a further increase.
3. Despite the exploding cost of the EITC, Republicans in Congress created another tax credit in the 1997 tax bill. The child credit was intended to make it easier for mothers to stay at home and raise their children, rather than work outside the home. Republicans and the Earned Income Tax Credit

4. “…the earned income tax credit ("EITC") that was enacted by Gerald Ford and then re-enacted and expanded in 1986 by... could it be, don't tell me, say it ain't so!... Ronald Reagan.” Reagan the Redistributor: Check Out the Earned Income Tax Credit | HuffPost

5. “…a child care tax deduction included in the immense Internal Revenue Code of 1954…” http://wfnetwork.bc.edu/encyclopedia_entry.php?id=17275&area=All

6. The origins of the EITC, which has done so much to reduce income tax liabilities for lower-income people, can be found in Ronald Reagans famous testimony before the Senate Finance Committee in 1972, where he proposed exempting the working poor from all Social Security and income taxes as an alternative to welfare. It was that testimony that led Congress to adopt the credit in 1975. As President, Reagan cut federal income tax rates across the board for all taxpayers by 25%. He also indexed the tax brackets for all taxpayers to prevent inflation from pushing workers into higher tax brackets. In the Tax Reform Act of 1986, President Reagan reduced the federal income tax rate for ”folks who make less” all the way down to 15%. That act also doubled the personal exemption, shielding more income from taxation for everybody, but a higher percentage of income of lower-income workers.

Gingrich’s Contract with America adopted a child tax credit of $500 per child that reduced tax liabilities of lower-income people by a higher percentage than for higher income people. And Bush doubled that credit to $1,000 per child, and made it refundable so that low-income people who do not even pay $1,000 in federal income tax still get full credit. And Bush adopted a lower tax bracket of 10%, a reduction of 33% (compared to the 11.6% drop for highest income workers.)

Thus, by 2007, the bottom 40% paid no income tax.
Ferrara, “ America’s Ticking Bankruptcy Bomb,” p. 220.




See....yet another lesson you should thank me for.

Anything to avoid paying a living wageand investing in our infrastructure and people, which means taxing the rich their fair share. And of course you save all that money with people who don't complete the forms...

Sit down....this will come as a shock: The Republicans pried the slaves away from the Democrats.....it was called the Civil War, it was in all the papers..


....this means that no one has to work at a job with which they are not satisfied.

Pay is offered, and it is voluntary at that point.

True story.

The Republican party has nothing to do with today's garbage propaganda racist GOP. Today it would be the liberal Democrats who would free the oppressed, and the GOP doing the oppressing. I know a tax cut for the rich LOL.

 

[CowboyTed]

Yeah......you call him a King and a tyrant...yet who spied on the press and on his political opponents?
Barack H. Obama.
Who has locked up his critics?
Barack H. Obama.

Right now the only people in Washington that thinks they're kings is Nancy Pelosi and Adam Schiff.

If you support Trump's assertion that the president can do what he wants then you have lost the moral authority to criticize any president ever.

That's not what is at issue here.
This impeachment is a political hatchet job created in the House by Democrats using fake evidence and perjured testimony by Obama Administration spies.
It's simply a continuation of the Russian Collusion hoax. They simply changed the country involved.

It is the central issue here. If any sort of investigation/impeachment of the president is illegitimate just because it is mostly partisan then we have lost the ability as a nation to hold the president accountable for his actions. Partisanship is not going away any time soon. We cannot allow this to become the new normal where the president feels safe to be as corrupt as they want.

Sounds nice, but it's total hogwash in this case. What you're saying is that it's okay to make anything a Republican president does become against the law just because you lost the election.
The problem with going down this slippery-slope is it will make anything any president does become grounds for impeachment...if it doesn't go along with the desires of the majority in the House. That's essentially a breach of the separation of powers and institutes mob rule.....which is not a Democracy.

We elected the democrats in the house specifically to hold the president accountable for his actions. It's not like Trump's own people didn't warn him he was on dangerous ground with the Ukraine affair but he did it anyway. Blame him for being stupid and lacking in foresight.

Trump behaved like a king and thought he was a king... Problem is he is a President and now he is going down the impeachment process for his behaviour...

@Mud, Don't worry, no one thinks the Senate will remove the President while his support numbers within GOP stay above 65%. He is kicking around 77%(see Below)... What Democrats are doing is increasing the cost of supporting Trump.. Trump did wrong, you have to get some pretty stupid not to admit that. GOP are going to try and lessen the charge and give him a pass, they just haven't gone there yet as they are afraid of more info. Democrats are going for bribery (or attempted bribery to be more percise), Soland testimony is vital in that...

 

[mudwhistle]

If you support Trump's assertion that the president can do what he wants then you have lost the moral authority to criticize any president ever.

That's not what is at issue here.
This impeachment is a political hatchet job created in the House by Democrats using fake evidence and perjured testimony by Obama Administration spies.
It's simply a continuation of the Russian Collusion hoax. They simply changed the country involved.

It is the central issue here. If any sort of investigation/impeachment of the president is illegitimate just because it is mostly partisan then we have lost the ability as a nation to hold the president accountable for his actions. Partisanship is not going away any time soon. We cannot allow this to become the new normal where the president feels safe to be as corrupt as they want.

Sounds nice, but it's total hogwash in this case. What you're saying is that it's okay to make anything a Republican president does become against the law just because you lost the election.
The problem with going down this slippery-slope is it will make anything any president does become grounds for impeachment...if it doesn't go along with the desires of the majority in the House. That's essentially a breach of the separation of powers and institutes mob rule.....which is not a Democracy.

We elected the democrats in the house specifically to hold the president accountable for his actions. It's not like Trump's own people didn't warn him he was on dangerous ground with the Ukraine affair but he did it anyway. Blame him for being stupid and lacking in foresight.

Trump behaved like a king and thought he was a king... Problem is he is a President and now he is going down the impeachment process for his behaviour...

@Mud, Don't worry, no one thinks the Senate will remove the President while his support numbers within GOP stay above 65%. He is kicking around 77%(see Below)... What Democrats are doing is increasing the cost of supporting Trump.. Trump did wrong, you have to get some pretty stupid not to admit that. GOP are going to try and lessen the charge and give him a pass, they just haven't gone there yet as they are afraid of more info. Democrats are going for bribery (or attempted bribery to be more percise), Soland testimony is vital in that...



View attachment 288728

I keep scratching my head wondering where you people one the left get this idea that Trump thinks he's a king.

Does a king have to answer to some judge in Hawaii every time he tries to secure the border???

Which king do you know of that was spied on by the Dictators he replaced?

Which king feels that the interests of the people of his country should come before the interests of foreign squatters?

Which king is being attacked for trying to root out corruption in the previous administration?

Which king isn't allowed to talk on the phone with foreign leaders without being called a criminal?

Most kings hang or imprison their enemies and critics. When has Trump done that???