I Feel Sorry For Democrats

[2aguy]

Again, how about putting some actual substance from one of your candidates up here for discussion. Just smearing people doesn't cut it anymore. Your candidate must have a platform to run on. Put it up here.

Go for it

Hillary Clinton on the issues

Here you go: Hillary and Bernie's plans: Tax the wealthy more. Raise the taxes on corporations and close their tax loopholes. The wealthy are already paying the lion's share of the federal income tax. Taxing corporations more and closing their tax loopholes will only lead to more corporations moving out of the country, job loss, and result in lower returns on investments of our elderly and many others who invest in the stocks of corporations. Hillary and Bernie's plans will kill off more jobs in an already depressed economy. Bernie did admit that the actual unemployment rate was 10% - not 5.6% as is touted by the Obama Administration. Bernie also stated that the unemployment rate in the Black community was 15% and that the unemployment rate among Black males with a high school education was 51%. So much for the two leading candidates of the Democrat Party's plans for jobs creation and the overall economy.

Tax the wealthy more....Our wealthy are paying the lowest tax rates in the last 70 years and it has not resulted in the proseperity and jobs that were promised. Why should we continue tax incentives that obviously are not doing what we thought they would?
We have had upper tax rates of 70-90% before and it did not kill jobs. In fact, we had great prosperity

The only reason we had prosperity under the 90% tax rate was that the rest of the world's industrial base was destroyed in World War 2………..and then Kennedy lowered the tax rate and we had an economic boom……...

Kennedy lowered the rate to 70%

I'm willing to go with Kennedy's lowered rate....are you?

nope....15% flat tax or consumption tax after getting rid of payroll deductions...

 

[rightwinger]

Go for it

Hillary Clinton on the issues

Here you go: Hillary and Bernie's plans: Tax the wealthy more. Raise the taxes on corporations and close their tax loopholes. The wealthy are already paying the lion's share of the federal income tax. Taxing corporations more and closing their tax loopholes will only lead to more corporations moving out of the country, job loss, and result in lower returns on investments of our elderly and many others who invest in the stocks of corporations. Hillary and Bernie's plans will kill off more jobs in an already depressed economy. Bernie did admit that the actual unemployment rate was 10% - not 5.6% as is touted by the Obama Administration. Bernie also stated that the unemployment rate in the Black community was 15% and that the unemployment rate among Black males with a high school education was 51%. So much for the two leading candidates of the Democrat Party's plans for jobs creation and the overall economy.

Tax the wealthy more....Our wealthy are paying the lowest tax rates in the last 70 years and it has not resulted in the proseperity and jobs that were promised. Why should we continue tax incentives that obviously are not doing what we thought they would?
We have had upper tax rates of 70-90% before and it did not kill jobs. In fact, we had great prosperity

The only reason we had prosperity under the 90% tax rate was that the rest of the world's industrial base was destroyed in World War 2………..and then Kennedy lowered the tax rate and we had an economic boom……...

Kennedy lowered the rate to 70%

I'm willing to go with Kennedy's lowered rate....are you?

nope....15% flat tax or consumption tax after getting rid of payroll deductions...

Trillion a year deficits

 

[SAYIT]

The discussion, as you well know, was about those who work, file tax returns, and pay no federal personal income tax. As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax...

First, it was Ray who said half of Americans don't pay taxes. Secondly, with 100 million not working out of a civilian noninstitutional population of 250 million is 40%...

I'm not certain what you mean by "non-institutional" Americans but as of July 4th, 2015 the US population was over 321 million (of which 140 mil work). So how many are "institutional?"

Ray's original post stated: "The problem is half of our country is not paying. In fact, the top 10% of wage earners in this country pay close to 70% of all collected income taxes."

I understood that to mean half of all wage earners - those paying income taxes - (which is the case), not all Americans. Only about 70 million tax filers (about 21% of the total pop) pay any federal personal income tax, meaning nearly 50% of all tax filers (and 80% of all Americans) pay nothing.

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load...

...Thirdly, while the top 50% of income workers pay 97%, they don't pay all of the taxes...

But they do pay virtually all of the federal personal income tax (and that is the topic at hand).

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load.
So what would satisfy you? 96%? 106%?

...Fourthly, who should pay the bulk of the taxes if not the highest wage earners? Fifthly, the answer to your question is about 96%.

As has been repeatedly illustrated, the highest wage earners do carry the bulk of the federal personal income tax load and while we could argue the justice of increasing the burden on the top 25% to 96% of the load - an 11.2% increase - it would neither completely close the deficit nor pay down our growing debt (the interest on which will soon hamstring funding for other gov't spending).

The civilian non-institutional population is those who are neither institutionalized nor military. The figure comes from the BLS which counts 250 million civilian non-institutional people in the U.S. aged 16 and up. Heaven knows why you want to count babies and inmates among those not working; in order to make your point?

As far as that 96% figure, what I meant was that I'm ok with the top 50% paying 96% of the taxes.

Whoa! It wasn't me who tried to expand Ray's conversation from those who file tax returns to all "non-institutional" Americans but rather YOU and the point remains that while 25% of America's earners carry 86% of the federal personal income tax load, 48% pay nothing.

 

[Faun]

That's your problem?

You said paying taxes is "robbery." Are you saying now it's only robbery depending on who pays taxes? Roughly 1/3 of people in the U.S. don't work and don't pay income tax. The vast majority of folks pay taxes as most states charge sales tax. Some pay more than others.

Our government goodies don't come from FICA, State taxes, City taxes and so on. Nearly your entire social program system is out of federal income taxes, just like our military is from federal income taxes, and roads, and bridges and.......

And you're wrong about one-third. Nearly half of Americans pay no federal income taxes. In essence, one half of our country is supporting the other half. Yet when you complain about who's paying what, you want the half that is paying to pay even more.

Faun has fudged the issue a bit. It isn't that half of all Americans pay no federal income tax but rather that 49% of all earners - those filing tax returns - pay none.

I said 1/3 of Americans don't work, and therefore, pay no taxes. What part of that do you imagine is fudged?

It would be interesting to know why 1/3 of Americans don't work. I am reasonably sure a good percentage are over the age of 65 and retired. There are other valid reasons for a person to not work due to mental or physical disability. By the same token, their are many people over 65 and who are disabled that do hold down jobs. The question I have is how many able bodied men and women don't work because they just don't want too?

That's pretty much it. There has been a boom since DumBama took office of people not looking for work. People realize the DumBama is the social program king and since he took over, we have records in food stamp usage and those not looking for work. But we also have record amounts of people filing for disability whether they can work or not:

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the growth in disability insurance beneficiaries has more to do with an aging population. There are other factors that could explain declining labor force participation. For example, “[d]ownward moves in labor-force participation can be attributed in part to increasing school enrollment” as more young people seek higher education, according to the Center for American Progress.

But the main factor is just “discouragement with the economy,” said Ruetschlin. “The idea that the benefits of going out and looking for a job in the market are far outweighed by the costs.”

Fewer Americans are working--or even looking for work. Why?

Holyshit.

Quoting an article from 2½ years ago while the unemployment rate was 50% higher than it is now?

 

[Faun]

I don't recall if any candidate has put forward a plan for a national sales tax which would make a lot of sense. Ted Cruz has posted on his web site his plan for a 10% flat tax which makes good sense and would result in practically gutting the corrupt IRS. His flat tax would let everyone above a set income level have skin in the game.

It's moronic ideas like that which is why Cruz will never be president of the United States. Such a foolish tax plan would produce about $1.5 trillion in revenue -- not even enough to cover current expenditures for military, non-discretionary items, and debt service. Even worse for such an idiotic plan ... is that we currently spend about $3.5 trillion per year, meaning Cruz will immediately skyrocket the national budget deficit to around $2 trillion.

More evidence that rightards shriek before they think.

Ironic that Bernie's economic plan is figured to cost $18 Trillion over ten years.

Not as ironic as you believing that figure.

But since you do.... explain what part of Sanders' will cost $18 trillion in 10 years......

He's not my candidate but here : Bernie Sanders' plans would cost $18 trillion

This is yet another reason why you're an idiot.

$15 trillion of that $18 trillion is attributed to a national health plan in which Sanders hasn't even revealed any details about.

 

[Faun]

Right on. These demorat candidates need to be more sharing about how many times they've hit their moms with hammers or tried stabbing their best friends.

Yes, liberals seem to love to dwell on our candidates childhood days. But Obama doped up in college? Not a problem there.

What happens in college stays in college

Bush was addicted

Addicted to what? What happens in college stays in college unless you write about it in your very own book.

http://www.drugfree.org/join-together/reflections-bush-talks-about-his-own-drug-addiction-problems/

At least he doesn't try to cover it up: White House Contradicted on Clinton Cocaine Use

If you want to include 3rd party folks making claims, I can show you the same sort of claims made about Bush.

 

[Faun]

The discussion, as you well know, was about those who work, file tax returns, and pay no federal personal income tax. As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax...

First, it was Ray who said half of Americans don't pay taxes. Secondly, with 100 million not working out of a civilian noninstitutional population of 250 million is 40%...

I'm not certain what you mean by "non-institutional" Americans but as of July 4th, 2015 the US population was over 321 million (of which 140 mil work). So how many are "institutional?"

Ray's original post stated: "The problem is half of our country is not paying. In fact, the top 10% of wage earners in this country pay close to 70% of all collected income taxes."

I understood that to mean half of all wage earners - those paying income taxes - (which is the case), not all Americans. Only about 70 million tax filers (about 21% of the total pop) pay any federal personal income tax, meaning nearly 50% of all tax filers (and 80% of all Americans) pay nothing.

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load...

...Thirdly, while the top 50% of income workers pay 97%, they don't pay all of the taxes...

But they do pay virtually all of the federal personal income tax (and that is the topic at hand).

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load.
So what would satisfy you? 96%? 106%?

...Fourthly, who should pay the bulk of the taxes if not the highest wage earners? Fifthly, the answer to your question is about 96%.

As has been repeatedly illustrated, the highest wage earners do carry the bulk of the federal personal income tax load and while we could argue the justice of increasing the burden on the top 25% to 96% of the load - an 11.2% increase - it would neither completely close the deficit nor pay down our growing debt (the interest on which will soon hamstring funding for other gov't spending).

The civilian non-institutional population is those who are neither institutionalized nor military. The figure comes from the BLS which counts 250 million civilian non-institutional people in the U.S. aged 16 and up. Heaven knows why you want to count babies and inmates among those not working; in order to make your point?

As far as that 96% figure, what I meant was that I'm ok with the top 50% paying 96% of the taxes.

I'm sure you are. You're not part of the top 50%. Are you okay with government buying you a new swimming pool too?????

You have no fucking clue what you're talking about.

 

[the_human_being]

I don't recall if any candidate has put forward a plan for a national sales tax which would make a lot of sense. Ted Cruz has posted on his web site his plan for a 10% flat tax which makes good sense and would result in practically gutting the corrupt IRS. His flat tax would let everyone above a set income level have skin in the game.

It's moronic ideas like that which is why Cruz will never be president of the United States. Such a foolish tax plan would produce about $1.5 trillion in revenue -- not even enough to cover current expenditures for military, non-discretionary items, and debt service. Even worse for such an idiotic plan ... is that we currently spend about $3.5 trillion per year, meaning Cruz will immediately skyrocket the national budget deficit to around $2 trillion.

More evidence that rightards shriek before they think.

Ironic that Bernie's economic plan is figured to cost $18 Trillion over ten years.

Not as ironic as you believing that figure.

But since you do.... explain what part of Sanders' will cost $18 trillion in 10 years......

He's not my candidate but here : Bernie Sanders' plans would cost $18 trillion

This is yet another reason why you're an idiot.

$15 trillion of that $18 trillion is attributed to a national health plan in which Sanders hasn't even revealed any details about.

I didn't author the article. The Wall Street Journal did. Like I said, he's not my candidate but you Liberals refuse to talk about your candidate's plans, you'd rather talk about what someone dis years ago.

 

[the_human_being]

The discussion, as you well know, was about those who work, file tax returns, and pay no federal personal income tax. As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax...

First, it was Ray who said half of Americans don't pay taxes. Secondly, with 100 million not working out of a civilian noninstitutional population of 250 million is 40%...

I'm not certain what you mean by "non-institutional" Americans but as of July 4th, 2015 the US population was over 321 million (of which 140 mil work). So how many are "institutional?"

Ray's original post stated: "The problem is half of our country is not paying. In fact, the top 10% of wage earners in this country pay close to 70% of all collected income taxes."

I understood that to mean half of all wage earners - those paying income taxes - (which is the case), not all Americans. Only about 70 million tax filers (about 21% of the total pop) pay any federal personal income tax, meaning nearly 50% of all tax filers (and 80% of all Americans) pay nothing.

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load...

...Thirdly, while the top 50% of income workers pay 97%, they don't pay all of the taxes...

But they do pay virtually all of the federal personal income tax (and that is the topic at hand).

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load.
So what would satisfy you? 96%? 106%?

...Fourthly, who should pay the bulk of the taxes if not the highest wage earners? Fifthly, the answer to your question is about 96%.

As has been repeatedly illustrated, the highest wage earners do carry the bulk of the federal personal income tax load and while we could argue the justice of increasing the burden on the top 25% to 96% of the load - an 11.2% increase - it would neither completely close the deficit nor pay down our growing debt (the interest on which will soon hamstring funding for other gov't spending).

The civilian non-institutional population is those who are neither institutionalized nor military. The figure comes from the BLS which counts 250 million civilian non-institutional people in the U.S. aged 16 and up. Heaven knows why you want to count babies and inmates among those not working; in order to make your point?

As far as that 96% figure, what I meant was that I'm ok with the top 50% paying 96% of the taxes.

I'm sure you are. You're not part of the top 50%. Are you okay with government buying you a new swimming pool too?????

You have no fucking clue what you're talking about.

Sound to me like you just described yourself.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Our government goodies don't come from FICA, State taxes, City taxes and so on. Nearly your entire social program system is out of federal income taxes, just like our military is from federal income taxes, and roads, and bridges and.......

And you're wrong about one-third. Nearly half of Americans pay no federal income taxes. In essence, one half of our country is supporting the other half. Yet when you complain about who's paying what, you want the half that is paying to pay even more.

Faun has fudged the issue a bit. It isn't that half of all Americans pay no federal income tax but rather that 49% of all earners - those filing tax returns - pay none.

I said 1/3 of Americans don't work, and therefore, pay no taxes. What part of that do you imagine is fudged?

It would be interesting to know why 1/3 of Americans don't work. I am reasonably sure a good percentage are over the age of 65 and retired. There are other valid reasons for a person to not work due to mental or physical disability. By the same token, their are many people over 65 and who are disabled that do hold down jobs. The question I have is how many able bodied men and women don't work because they just don't want too?

That's pretty much it. There has been a boom since DumBama took office of people not looking for work. People realize the DumBama is the social program king and since he took over, we have records in food stamp usage and those not looking for work. But we also have record amounts of people filing for disability whether they can work or not:

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the growth in disability insurance beneficiaries has more to do with an aging population. There are other factors that could explain declining labor force participation. For example, “[d]ownward moves in labor-force participation can be attributed in part to increasing school enrollment” as more young people seek higher education, according to the Center for American Progress.

But the main factor is just “discouragement with the economy,” said Ruetschlin. “The idea that the benefits of going out and looking for a job in the market are far outweighed by the costs.”

Fewer Americans are working--or even looking for work. Why?

Holyshit.

Quoting an article from 2½ years ago while the unemployment rate was 50% higher than it is now?

So what's your explanation why we have record amounts of people not working in this country? Oh yeah, and please post your resources. Thank you.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The discussion, as you well know, was about those who work, file tax returns, and pay no federal personal income tax. As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax...

First, it was Ray who said half of Americans don't pay taxes. Secondly, with 100 million not working out of a civilian noninstitutional population of 250 million is 40%...

I'm not certain what you mean by "non-institutional" Americans but as of July 4th, 2015 the US population was over 321 million (of which 140 mil work). So how many are "institutional?"

Ray's original post stated: "The problem is half of our country is not paying. In fact, the top 10% of wage earners in this country pay close to 70% of all collected income taxes."

I understood that to mean half of all wage earners - those paying income taxes - (which is the case), not all Americans. Only about 70 million tax filers (about 21% of the total pop) pay any federal personal income tax, meaning nearly 50% of all tax filers (and 80% of all Americans) pay nothing.

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load...

...Thirdly, while the top 50% of income workers pay 97%, they don't pay all of the taxes...

But they do pay virtually all of the federal personal income tax (and that is the topic at hand).

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load.
So what would satisfy you? 96%? 106%?

...Fourthly, who should pay the bulk of the taxes if not the highest wage earners? Fifthly, the answer to your question is about 96%.

As has been repeatedly illustrated, the highest wage earners do carry the bulk of the federal personal income tax load and while we could argue the justice of increasing the burden on the top 25% to 96% of the load - an 11.2% increase - it would neither completely close the deficit nor pay down our growing debt (the interest on which will soon hamstring funding for other gov't spending).

The civilian non-institutional population is those who are neither institutionalized nor military. The figure comes from the BLS which counts 250 million civilian non-institutional people in the U.S. aged 16 and up. Heaven knows why you want to count babies and inmates among those not working; in order to make your point?

As far as that 96% figure, what I meant was that I'm ok with the top 50% paying 96% of the taxes.

I'm sure you are. You're not part of the top 50%. Are you okay with government buying you a new swimming pool too?????

You have no fucking clue what you're talking about.

Sure I do. When the government takes money from other people than yourself, you have absolutely no problem with that at all. Take money from you, and you would be kicking and screaming all over this forum.

 

[Faun]

The discussion, as you well know, was about those who work, file tax returns, and pay no federal personal income tax. As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax...

First, it was Ray who said half of Americans don't pay taxes. Secondly, with 100 million not working out of a civilian noninstitutional population of 250 million is 40%...

I'm not certain what you mean by "non-institutional" Americans but as of July 4th, 2015 the US population was over 321 million (of which 140 mil work). So how many are "institutional?"

Ray's original post stated: "The problem is half of our country is not paying. In fact, the top 10% of wage earners in this country pay close to 70% of all collected income taxes."

I understood that to mean half of all wage earners - those paying income taxes - (which is the case), not all Americans. Only about 70 million tax filers (about 21% of the total pop) pay any federal personal income tax, meaning nearly 50% of all tax filers (and 80% of all Americans) pay nothing.

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load...

...Thirdly, while the top 50% of income workers pay 97%, they don't pay all of the taxes...

But they do pay virtually all of the federal personal income tax (and that is the topic at hand).

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load.
So what would satisfy you? 96%? 106%?

...Fourthly, who should pay the bulk of the taxes if not the highest wage earners? Fifthly, the answer to your question is about 96%.

As has been repeatedly illustrated, the highest wage earners do carry the bulk of the federal personal income tax load and while we could argue the justice of increasing the burden on the top 25% to 96% of the load - an 11.2% increase - it would neither completely close the deficit nor pay down our growing debt (the interest on which will soon hamstring funding for other gov't spending).

The civilian non-institutional population is those who are neither institutionalized nor military. The figure comes from the BLS which counts 250 million civilian non-institutional people in the U.S. aged 16 and up. Heaven knows why you want to count babies and inmates among those not working; in order to make your point?

As far as that 96% figure, what I meant was that I'm ok with the top 50% paying 96% of the taxes.

Whoa! It wasn't me who tried to expand Ray's conversation from those who file tax returns to all "non-institutional" Americans but rather YOU and the point remains that while 25% of America's earners carry 86% of the federal personal income tax load, 48% pay nothing.

Again .... Ray's initial post on the subject ...

"The problem is half of our country is not paying."​

As you can see ... again ... I did not expand his post to include anyone he himself didn't already include. And in fact, I narrowed down his sample of "half our country" to just those who are employable.

As far the claim that 48% of working folks pay no federal income tax -- prove it.

 

[Faun]

It's moronic ideas like that which is why Cruz will never be president of the United States. Such a foolish tax plan would produce about $1.5 trillion in revenue -- not even enough to cover current expenditures for military, non-discretionary items, and debt service. Even worse for such an idiotic plan ... is that we currently spend about $3.5 trillion per year, meaning Cruz will immediately skyrocket the national budget deficit to around $2 trillion.

More evidence that rightards shriek before they think.

Ironic that Bernie's economic plan is figured to cost $18 Trillion over ten years.

Not as ironic as you believing that figure.

But since you do.... explain what part of Sanders' will cost $18 trillion in 10 years......

He's not my candidate but here : Bernie Sanders' plans would cost $18 trillion

This is yet another reason why you're an idiot.

$15 trillion of that $18 trillion is attributed to a national health plan in which Sanders hasn't even revealed any details about.

I didn't author the article. The Wall Street Journal did. Like I said, he's not my candidate but you Liberals refuse to talk about your candidate's plans, you'd rather talk about what someone dis years ago.

Of course you didn't author it. You're not bright enough. Your G-d given limitations restrict you to parroting it. Hell you couldn't even understand it. For you, writing it would have been like a spider monkey writing the Bible.

 

[Faun]

First, it was Ray who said half of Americans don't pay taxes. Secondly, with 100 million not working out of a civilian noninstitutional population of 250 million is 40%...

I'm not certain what you mean by "non-institutional" Americans but as of July 4th, 2015 the US population was over 321 million (of which 140 mil work). So how many are "institutional?"

Ray's original post stated: "The problem is half of our country is not paying. In fact, the top 10% of wage earners in this country pay close to 70% of all collected income taxes."

I understood that to mean half of all wage earners - those paying income taxes - (which is the case), not all Americans. Only about 70 million tax filers (about 21% of the total pop) pay any federal personal income tax, meaning nearly 50% of all tax filers (and 80% of all Americans) pay nothing.

...Thirdly, while the top 50% of income workers pay 97%, they don't pay all of the taxes...

But they do pay virtually all of the federal personal income tax (and that is the topic at hand).

...Fourthly, who should pay the bulk of the taxes if not the highest wage earners? Fifthly, the answer to your question is about 96%.

As has been repeatedly illustrated, the highest wage earners do carry the bulk of the federal personal income tax load and while we could argue the justice of increasing the burden on the top 25% to 96% of the load - an 11.2% increase - it would neither completely close the deficit nor pay down our growing debt (the interest on which will soon hamstring funding for other gov't spending).

The civilian non-institutional population is those who are neither institutionalized nor military. The figure comes from the BLS which counts 250 million civilian non-institutional people in the U.S. aged 16 and up. Heaven knows why you want to count babies and inmates among those not working; in order to make your point?

As far as that 96% figure, what I meant was that I'm ok with the top 50% paying 96% of the taxes.

I'm sure you are. You're not part of the top 50%. Are you okay with government buying you a new swimming pool too?????

You have no fucking clue what you're talking about.

Sound to me like you just described yourself.

Spider monkey, I'm not the one here telling others how much they earn as though I know better than they do.

 

[the_human_being]

The discussion, as you well know, was about those who work, file tax returns, and pay no federal personal income tax. As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax...

First, it was Ray who said half of Americans don't pay taxes. Secondly, with 100 million not working out of a civilian noninstitutional population of 250 million is 40%...

I'm not certain what you mean by "non-institutional" Americans but as of July 4th, 2015 the US population was over 321 million (of which 140 mil work). So how many are "institutional?"

Ray's original post stated: "The problem is half of our country is not paying. In fact, the top 10% of wage earners in this country pay close to 70% of all collected income taxes."

I understood that to mean half of all wage earners - those paying income taxes - (which is the case), not all Americans. Only about 70 million tax filers (about 21% of the total pop) pay any federal personal income tax, meaning nearly 50% of all tax filers (and 80% of all Americans) pay nothing.

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load...

...Thirdly, while the top 50% of income workers pay 97%, they don't pay all of the taxes...

But they do pay virtually all of the federal personal income tax (and that is the topic at hand).

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load.
So what would satisfy you? 96%? 106%?

...Fourthly, who should pay the bulk of the taxes if not the highest wage earners? Fifthly, the answer to your question is about 96%.

As has been repeatedly illustrated, the highest wage earners do carry the bulk of the federal personal income tax load and while we could argue the justice of increasing the burden on the top 25% to 96% of the load - an 11.2% increase - it would neither completely close the deficit nor pay down our growing debt (the interest on which will soon hamstring funding for other gov't spending).

The civilian non-institutional population is those who are neither institutionalized nor military. The figure comes from the BLS which counts 250 million civilian non-institutional people in the U.S. aged 16 and up. Heaven knows why you want to count babies and inmates among those not working; in order to make your point?

As far as that 96% figure, what I meant was that I'm ok with the top 50% paying 96% of the taxes.

Whoa! It wasn't me who tried to expand Ray's conversation from those who file tax returns to all "non-institutional" Americans but rather YOU and the point remains that while 25% of America's earners carry 86% of the federal personal income tax load, 48% pay nothing.

It was you who said

The discussion, as you well know, was about those who work, file tax returns, and pay no federal personal income tax. As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax...

First, it was Ray who said half of Americans don't pay taxes. Secondly, with 100 million not working out of a civilian noninstitutional population of 250 million is 40%...

I'm not certain what you mean by "non-institutional" Americans but as of July 4th, 2015 the US population was over 321 million (of which 140 mil work). So how many are "institutional?"

Ray's original post stated: "The problem is half of our country is not paying. In fact, the top 10% of wage earners in this country pay close to 70% of all collected income taxes."

I understood that to mean half of all wage earners - those paying income taxes - (which is the case), not all Americans. Only about 70 million tax filers (about 21% of the total pop) pay any federal personal income tax, meaning nearly 50% of all tax filers (and 80% of all Americans) pay nothing.

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load...

...Thirdly, while the top 50% of income workers pay 97%, they don't pay all of the taxes...

But they do pay virtually all of the federal personal income tax (and that is the topic at hand).

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load.
So what would satisfy you? 96%? 106%?

...Fourthly, who should pay the bulk of the taxes if not the highest wage earners? Fifthly, the answer to your question is about 96%.

As has been repeatedly illustrated, the highest wage earners do carry the bulk of the federal personal income tax load and while we could argue the justice of increasing the burden on the top 25% to 96% of the load - an 11.2% increase - it would neither completely close the deficit nor pay down our growing debt (the interest on which will soon hamstring funding for other gov't spending).

The civilian non-institutional population is those who are neither institutionalized nor military. The figure comes from the BLS which counts 250 million civilian non-institutional people in the U.S. aged 16 and up. Heaven knows why you want to count babies and inmates among those not working; in order to make your point?

As far as that 96% figure, what I meant was that I'm ok with the top 50% paying 96% of the taxes.

Whoa! It wasn't me who tried to expand Ray's conversation from those who file tax returns to all "non-institutional" Americans but rather YOU and the point remains that while 25% of America's earners carry 86% of the federal personal income tax load, 48% pay nothing.

Again .... Ray's initial post on the subject ...

"The problem is half of our country is not paying."​

As you can see ... again ... I did not expand his post to include anyone he himself didn't already include. And in fact, I narrowed down his sample of "half our country" to just those who are employable.

As far the claim that 48% of working folks pay no federal income tax -- prove it.

The idiot actually thinks someone pays attention to what he says.

 

[the_human_being]

 

[the_human_being]

 

[the_human_being]

 

[SAYIT]

The discussion, as you well know, was about those who work, file tax returns, and pay no federal personal income tax. As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax...

First, it was Ray who said half of Americans don't pay taxes. Secondly, with 100 million not working out of a civilian noninstitutional population of 250 million is 40%...

I'm not certain what you mean by "non-institutional" Americans but as of July 4th, 2015 the US population was over 321 million (of which 140 mil work). So how many are "institutional?"

Ray's original post stated: "The problem is half of our country is not paying. In fact, the top 10% of wage earners in this country pay close to 70% of all collected income taxes."

I understood that to mean half of all wage earners - those paying income taxes - (which is the case), not all Americans. Only about 70 million tax filers (about 21% of the total pop) pay any federal personal income tax, meaning nearly 50% of all tax filers (and 80% of all Americans) pay nothing.

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load...

...Thirdly, while the top 50% of income workers pay 97%, they don't pay all of the taxes...

But they do pay virtually all of the federal personal income tax (and that is the topic at hand).

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load.
So what would satisfy you? 96%? 106%?

...Fourthly, who should pay the bulk of the taxes if not the highest wage earners? Fifthly, the answer to your question is about 96%.

As has been repeatedly illustrated, the highest wage earners do carry the bulk of the federal personal income tax load and while we could argue the justice of increasing the burden on the top 25% to 96% of the load - an 11.2% increase - it would neither completely close the deficit nor pay down our growing debt (the interest on which will soon hamstring funding for other gov't spending).

The civilian non-institutional population is those who are neither institutionalized nor military. The figure comes from the BLS which counts 250 million civilian non-institutional people in the U.S. aged 16 and up. Heaven knows why you want to count babies and inmates among those not working; in order to make your point?

As far as that 96% figure, what I meant was that I'm ok with the top 50% paying 96% of the taxes.

Whoa! It wasn't me who tried to expand Ray's conversation from those who file tax returns to all "non-institutional" Americans but rather YOU and the point remains that while 25% of America's earners carry 86% of the federal personal income tax load, 48% pay nothing.

It was you who said

The discussion, as you well know, was about those who work, file tax returns, and pay no federal personal income tax. As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax...

First, it was Ray who said half of Americans don't pay taxes. Secondly, with 100 million not working out of a civilian noninstitutional population of 250 million is 40%...

I'm not certain what you mean by "non-institutional" Americans but as of July 4th, 2015 the US population was over 321 million (of which 140 mil work). So how many are "institutional?"

Ray's original post stated: "The problem is half of our country is not paying. In fact, the top 10% of wage earners in this country pay close to 70% of all collected income taxes."

I understood that to mean half of all wage earners - those paying income taxes - (which is the case), not all Americans. Only about 70 million tax filers (about 21% of the total pop) pay any federal personal income tax, meaning nearly 50% of all tax filers (and 80% of all Americans) pay nothing.

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load...

...Thirdly, while the top 50% of income workers pay 97%, they don't pay all of the taxes...

But they do pay virtually all of the federal personal income tax (and that is the topic at hand).

...As Ray correctly noted, nearly half of all filers pay no fed income tax... while "the rich" - the top 25% of filers - carry 86% of the load.
So what would satisfy you? 96%? 106%?

...Fourthly, who should pay the bulk of the taxes if not the highest wage earners? Fifthly, the answer to your question is about 96%.

As has been repeatedly illustrated, the highest wage earners do carry the bulk of the federal personal income tax load and while we could argue the justice of increasing the burden on the top 25% to 96% of the load - an 11.2% increase - it would neither completely close the deficit nor pay down our growing debt (the interest on which will soon hamstring funding for other gov't spending).

The civilian non-institutional population is those who are neither institutionalized nor military. The figure comes from the BLS which counts 250 million civilian non-institutional people in the U.S. aged 16 and up. Heaven knows why you want to count babies and inmates among those not working; in order to make your point?

As far as that 96% figure, what I meant was that I'm ok with the top 50% paying 96% of the taxes.

Whoa! It wasn't me who tried to expand Ray's conversation from those who file tax returns to all "non-institutional" Americans but rather YOU and the point remains that while 25% of America's earners carry 86% of the federal personal income tax load, 48% pay nothing.

Again .... Ray's initial post on the subject ...

"The problem is half of our country is not paying."​

As you can see ... again ... I did not expand his post to include anyone he himself didn't already include. And in fact, I narrowed down his sample of "half our country" to just those who are employable.

As far the claim that 48% of working folks pay no federal income tax -- prove it.

Truncating Ray's statement ("The problem is half of our country is not paying. In fact, the top 10% of wage earners in this country pay close to 70% of all collected income taxes") not only changed its meaning to suit your nefarious purpose, it's as disingenuous as it is dishonest.

I had a higher opinion of you and have defended you in the past.

As to your demand for proof of truth ... you don't know how to use GOOGLE?
Those loony lib HACKs at CNBC authored the following based on a study by the "non-partisan Tax Policy Center":

"The top-earning 1 percent of Americans will pay nearly half of the federal income taxes for 2014, the largest share in at least three years, according to a study.

According to a projection from the non-partisan Tax Policy Center, the top 1 percent of Americans will pay 45.7 percent of the individual income taxes in 2014—up from 43 percent in 2013 and 40 percent in 2012 (the oldest period available).

The bottom 80 percent of Americans are expected to pay 15 percent of all federal income taxes in 2014, according to the study. The bottom 60 percent are expected to pay less than 2 percent of federal income taxes."

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...s.html&usg=AFQjCNFRfY5H7lgBzlfWCQ78qUviILkkvg

 

[Faun]

Faun has fudged the issue a bit. It isn't that half of all Americans pay no federal income tax but rather that 49% of all earners - those filing tax returns - pay none.

I said 1/3 of Americans don't work, and therefore, pay no taxes. What part of that do you imagine is fudged?

It would be interesting to know why 1/3 of Americans don't work. I am reasonably sure a good percentage are over the age of 65 and retired. There are other valid reasons for a person to not work due to mental or physical disability. By the same token, their are many people over 65 and who are disabled that do hold down jobs. The question I have is how many able bodied men and women don't work because they just don't want too?

That's pretty much it. There has been a boom since DumBama took office of people not looking for work. People realize the DumBama is the social program king and since he took over, we have records in food stamp usage and those not looking for work. But we also have record amounts of people filing for disability whether they can work or not:

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, the growth in disability insurance beneficiaries has more to do with an aging population. There are other factors that could explain declining labor force participation. For example, “[d]ownward moves in labor-force participation can be attributed in part to increasing school enrollment” as more young people seek higher education, according to the Center for American Progress.

But the main factor is just “discouragement with the economy,” said Ruetschlin. “The idea that the benefits of going out and looking for a job in the market are far outweighed by the costs.”

Fewer Americans are working--or even looking for work. Why?

Holyshit.

Quoting an article from 2½ years ago while the unemployment rate was 50% higher than it is now?

So what's your explanation why we have record amounts of people not working in this country? Oh yeah, and please post your resources. Thank you.

I'll just offer my opinion. It matters not if you disagree.

The following reasons, in no particular order of significance and probably not exhaustive:

-We have a record number of folks not working every year
-The Great Recession
-Easy access to disability checks
-Easy access to SNAP
-Explosion of retirees
-Don't want to work
- More people working in the shadow economy