Should The Rich Be Required To Pay Higher Taxes In the US?

[Boss]

Bitter and envious. Pretty sad that at 80 you are still a bitter old person. You realized the Kennedy kids did nothing and took their daddy's bootlegging money. They drank, partied and killed. Funny how you don't care about that.

You don't really believe Campbell is 80 do you? I'm sorry but I can't buy that. I know people who are 80 and they don't spend time at USMB arguing generic Socialist-Communist clap trap. They just don't. A rare few 80-year-olds even get on the Internet and when they do it's almost comical.

My experience as a psychologist tells me that Campbell is more than likely someone who is ashamed of his young age and thinks that he can pull off this masquerade. The left-wing Millennials are extremely brash and confident to be as stupid as they are.

I surmise Campbell is under 30, perhaps under 20. He is well-armed with stories of "the olden days" but these can come from anywhere. He does this because he thinks that his being 80 will somehow lend greater influence to what he is saying. I know he will deny this but he knows it is true and the fact that he knows this should give him pause. If the ideas were so great you wouldn't need to promote them as "80-year-old-man-wisdom" they would stand on merit.

 

[Campbell]

What you mean is the ones who have the background and means to graduate from an ivy league school.

No, there are TONS of successful people who didn't have an Ivy League education. Or, money given to them by a wealthy relative. That's the great thing about a free society like ours, you can be successful with nothing more than your talent/skill, brain, drive and ambition. Nothing limits you... with the exception of ever-increasing Socialist government.

My brother-in-law is a classic case in point. He didn't finish high school, but apprenticed himself to a cabinet maker for a couple of years just to learn the trade. Now he owns his own shop and is a huge success. It can be done, but it's not easy. It requires taking big risks and being 110% committed. Maybe that's the problem.

So he earns what...two or three mil a year?

Owns his own shop! We're talking about the upper 5%-10% of earners. You know...folks like professional sports stars and NASCAR drivers. All you need is to be born with quick reflexes and athletic ability LOL!

Seriously....those who are financially able to attend ivy league schools are a small percentage. Community colleges and small state schools are the best goal for those who don't have the means.

I confess that I do find it interesting that folks here consider the military service personnel to be low achievers who flunked out of school. Most of them have a good high school education and just didn't have the financial means to attend college. In other words a built in crew to travel 10,000 miles and fight in the Republican oil wars.

When Richard Nixon did away with the military draft he knew exactly what he was doing. Fixing it so the upper crust wouldn't have to worry about it.

 

[Boss]

So he earns what...two or three mil a year?

Owns his own shop! We're talking about the upper 5%-10% of earners. You know...folks like professional sports stars and NASCAR drivers. All you need is to be born with quick reflexes and athletic ability LOL!

Or you could also be like Armando de Quesada, a Cuban immigrant who came here in 1964 at age 40 with his wife and a dream and nothing more than his determination to succeed. By 1967, he saved up enough to open his first restaurant. Mando's Pizza and Italian Food soon became an icon in the region and he eventually had a chain of eateries, as well as numerous other business projects all around the South. Now, he probably wouldn't make the Top 10% today because there is so many more people in the Top 10% today...but I bet he would've been close back in the 80s. He passed away in 2004 and his family is still quite wealthy.

Or could be... we're talking about Edward Guice, a younger man who worked for Armando and learned from his business acumen and realized his dream of opening his own pharmacy. You see, success breeds success. Being around inspiring people, inspires. That is what you are missing in your life, just in case you didn't know.

 

[Campbell]

So he earns what...two or three mil a year?

Owns his own shop! We're talking about the upper 5%-10% of earners. You know...folks like professional sports stars and NASCAR drivers. All you need is to be born with quick reflexes and athletic ability LOL!

Or you could also be like Armando de Quesada, a Cuban immigrant who came here in 1964 at age 40 with his wife and a dream and nothing more than his determination to succeed. By 1967, he saved up enough to open his first restaurant. Mando's Pizza and Italian Food soon became an icon in the region and he eventually had a chain of eateries, as well as numerous other business projects all around the South. Now, he probably wouldn't make the Top 10% today because there is so many more people in the Top 10% today...but I bet he would've been close back in the 80s. He passed away in 2004 and his family is still quite wealthy.

Or could be... we're talking about Edward Guice, a younger man who worked for Armando and learned from his business acumen and realized his dream of opening his own pharmacy. You see, success breeds success. Being around inspiring people, inspires. That is what you are missing in your life, just in case you didn't know.

We could talk about the 6,500 who died in Bush's wars, the one in Iraq(4,500 dead, 35,000 seriously wounded) totally unnecessary. The Republican party has become the party of the rich and corporations and what amazes me is that any common people actually support that bunch of dolts.

 

[Boss]

We could talk about the 6,500 who died in Bush's wars, the one in Iraq(4,500 dead, 35,000 seriously wounded) totally unnecessary. The Republican party has become the party of the rich and corporations and what amazes me is that any common people actually support that bunch of dolts.

You want to talk about the fact they were all volunteers who made the choice to serve their country and go fight a war you pissed away any hopes of being worthwhile? Or the hundreds of thousands of socialist-supported thug terrorist scum they killed?

And what is your deal with the Republican party? I'm not a Republican, I am a conservative and we were talking about free market capitalism versus socialism. I actually think Bush was more Socialist than Clinton. This isn't about political parties. You've obviously hitched your wagon to a party and you want to run on the 19th century failed Socialist platform... so be it! ...Let's see who wins this baby? I'm betting America is about fed up with you.

 

[hadit]

And I'm pointing out that Washington WILL NOT apply any new revenue to debt reduction. The last Congress that came close was the one that held Bill Clinton's spending in check enough to allow revenue to catch up to spending. We currently have RECORD levels of revenue flooding into the treasury right now, yet still have deficits as far as the eye can see. Until Washington gains some spending restraint, any new revenue is as useful as handing a meth addict a hundred dollar bill to get his electricity turned back on.

we dont have the time to sit around and wait for your supposed pressure to build up to realization....we have to accept that from the beginning of the country basically a certain level of government spending is inevitable.....and that a certain level of tax revenue is needed.....now maybe you dont want to take it back up to even....but need more taxes on the rich now so that debt doesnt get past the point of no retrun.

You don't understand. Raising taxes without spending restraint is foolish in the extreme. It will only increase the debt. You don't give a meth addict money, hoping he'll better his life, because you KNOW he will simply buy more meth. Same with the crew now in Washington. With a few notable exceptions, they have proven themselves incapable of fiscal sanity.

well then put in, or advocate, some spending restraint.....dont just condemn us to fiscal insanity and bankruptcy by dismissing out of hand increasing taxes on the rich...which is the only way to get us climbing our way out of this hole.

What do you think conservative fiscal policy is all about, but restraint? You have to have the intervention first, then rehab, then you can talk about getting back on your feet. Right now, Washington is in full spending addiction mode.

well True conservatives should then not focus on not raising taxes...........but focus on putting restraints on spending, and/or restricting increased taxes to pay down the debt....instead of just saying "no increased taxes"...Republicans have shown little restraint in reality...........they recently voted to ignore restrictions of funds I believe in defense spending..........

Republican =/= conservative, that's one issue right there. Then there are big government Republicans who increase spending, like George Bush did. Now defense spending is dictated by the Constitution, so many see it as a necessary thing. That is, after all, one of the federal government's mandated activities. The amount of spending is debatable, since we already spend a LOT on it.

 

[dcraelin]

we dont have the time to sit around and wait for your supposed pressure to build up to realization....we have to accept that from the beginning of the country basically a certain level of government spending is inevitable.....and that a certain level of tax revenue is needed.....now maybe you dont want to take it back up to even....but need more taxes on the rich now so that debt doesnt get past the point of no retrun.

You don't understand. Raising taxes without spending restraint is foolish in the extreme. It will only increase the debt. You don't give a meth addict money, hoping he'll better his life, because you KNOW he will simply buy more meth. Same with the crew now in Washington. With a few notable exceptions, they have proven themselves incapable of fiscal sanity.

well then put in, or advocate, some spending restraint.....dont just condemn us to fiscal insanity and bankruptcy by dismissing out of hand increasing taxes on the rich...which is the only way to get us climbing our way out of this hole.

What do you think conservative fiscal policy is all about, but restraint? You have to have the intervention first, then rehab, then you can talk about getting back on your feet. Right now, Washington is in full spending addiction mode.

well True conservatives should then not focus on not raising taxes...........but focus on putting restraints on spending, and/or restricting increased taxes to pay down the debt....instead of just saying "no increased taxes"...Republicans have shown little restraint in reality...........they recently voted to ignore restrictions of funds I believe in defense spending..........

Republican =/= conservative, that's one issue right there. Then there are big government Republicans who increase spending, like George Bush did. Now defense spending is dictated by the Constitution, so many see it as a necessary thing. That is, after all, one of the federal government's mandated activities. The amount of spending is debatable, since we already spend a LOT on it.

I agree, largely......but acknowledging these facts does nothing to solve our ballooning debt.

 

[Papageorgio]

So he earns what...two or three mil a year?

Owns his own shop! We're talking about the upper 5%-10% of earners. You know...folks like professional sports stars and NASCAR drivers. All you need is to be born with quick reflexes and athletic ability LOL!

Or you could also be like Armando de Quesada, a Cuban immigrant who came here in 1964 at age 40 with his wife and a dream and nothing more than his determination to succeed. By 1967, he saved up enough to open his first restaurant. Mando's Pizza and Italian Food soon became an icon in the region and he eventually had a chain of eateries, as well as numerous other business projects all around the South. Now, he probably wouldn't make the Top 10% today because there is so many more people in the Top 10% today...but I bet he would've been close back in the 80s. He passed away in 2004 and his family is still quite wealthy.

Or could be... we're talking about Edward Guice, a younger man who worked for Armando and learned from his business acumen and realized his dream of opening his own pharmacy. You see, success breeds success. Being around inspiring people, inspires. That is what you are missing in your life, just in case you didn't know.

We could talk about the 6,500 who died in Bush's wars, the one in Iraq(4,500 dead, 35,000 seriously wounded) totally unnecessary. The Republican party has become the party of the rich and corporations and what amazes me is that any common people actually support that bunch of dolts.

And you think the Democrats are any different? Obama extended the healthcare requirement on businesses while not extending the burden on the middle class taxpayer. GE, Obama's corporate baby paid little if any taxes. Didn't see anyone cry over that. When Enron's scheme was exposed, some executive teams spent jail time. Obama's Justice Dept have failed to prosecute anyone after the collapse. The Democrat's "Sir" Hillary Clinton's n is in deep with the corporations and she is the front runner to replace Obama who is also loved by Wall St.

I don't buy the Democrats are for anyone, other than the rich, they just disguise it better.

 

[danielpalos]

Tip for "stingy Capitalists"; there is no need for a capital gains preference if you are unwilling to pay to ensure promptness in filling any given position under our form of Capitalism, with any laws of demand and supply.

Oh they've got things going their way. Look at this and make note that the lowest half of earners haven't even broken even when adjusted for inflation:

You're a moron. You see the bottom 10% being 16% higher as a bad thing. You see the middle being 25% higher as a bad thing. You see the upper middle class doubling as a bad thing. You see the rich being 300% higher as a bad thing. You Know why you see these as bad things? Because you're dumb ass piece of shit that can't even crack the bottom 1%. And who do you blame for not being rich? The people who are successful. ROFL What a dumb ass communist piece of shit you are. You want to move from the bottom to the top? GET UP OFF YOUR ASS.

Dude; that graph merely shows how the wealthiest can simply purchase better privileges and immunities than the less wealthy.

 

[danielpalos]

What about the guy who barely gets through high school and ends up having to pull two tours in Iraq?

No one forced him to goof off and not study in high school OR join the military. Those were HIS choices. Again, in a free and open society, we have choices. You have the choice to be anything you want to be. That's exactly why so many people want to come here.

Horse shit!! I can immediately tell that you have absolutely no idea about being poor. Once when I was about five years old and my daddy had hurt himself on the job and was fired my sister and I used to walk a mile up a busy west TN highway to a farm where they gave us milk by the gallon. People like you make my ass want to suck a lemon.

Ketchup soup? Did you ever have it? It's pretty gross but it's better than starving. I do know what it's like to be poor. That's what motivated me at a very early age to be something else. I was bound and determined to not be a "worker" and not be poor all my life.

I'm sorry that you somehow resent ME for your impoverished upbringing but I didn't have anything to do with that. On your little graphs and charts, I was belonging to the bar for the lower 5% during most of the 70s and 80s. Around the mid 80s, I belonged to the middle bars groups and by the late 90s, I was part of the upper 5% group. I can also tell you that government handouts had nothing to do with my success.

You are mired in propaganda constructed by Socialists who want to destroy the Capitalist free market system. It is ALL predicated on the idea that we are born into our class and never leave it. This is why you have charts comparing "group A" with "group B" without acknowledging the groups are constantly changing. If the groups always remained the same, then your propaganda makes rational emotional sense. Group B is doing better... growing faster... enjoying a better life... But group B is always accepting people from group A and visa versa. We are not confined by our class.

Dude, Capitalism did that to itself in 1929; why do you believe FDR had to use so much socialism to bail us out.

 

[hadit]

You don't understand. Raising taxes without spending restraint is foolish in the extreme. It will only increase the debt. You don't give a meth addict money, hoping he'll better his life, because you KNOW he will simply buy more meth. Same with the crew now in Washington. With a few notable exceptions, they have proven themselves incapable of fiscal sanity.

well then put in, or advocate, some spending restraint.....dont just condemn us to fiscal insanity and bankruptcy by dismissing out of hand increasing taxes on the rich...which is the only way to get us climbing our way out of this hole.

What do you think conservative fiscal policy is all about, but restraint? You have to have the intervention first, then rehab, then you can talk about getting back on your feet. Right now, Washington is in full spending addiction mode.

well True conservatives should then not focus on not raising taxes...........but focus on putting restraints on spending, and/or restricting increased taxes to pay down the debt....instead of just saying "no increased taxes"...Republicans have shown little restraint in reality...........they recently voted to ignore restrictions of funds I believe in defense spending..........

Republican =/= conservative, that's one issue right there. Then there are big government Republicans who increase spending, like George Bush did. Now defense spending is dictated by the Constitution, so many see it as a necessary thing. That is, after all, one of the federal government's mandated activities. The amount of spending is debatable, since we already spend a LOT on it.

I agree, largely......but acknowledging these facts does nothing to solve our ballooning debt.

That is correct, and that is why we WILL do nothing to resolve the debt issue until we simply can't finance it any longer and we default. Even then, I predict that there will politicians who will promise even more new spending. The dirty secret is that we already have more than enough revenue coming in to continue scheduled debt payments even if we refused to lift the debt ceiling any higher. We just choose to spend it elsewhere. Watch the election season. Every candidate is going to try to out-do all the others in promising new spending.

 

[dcraelin]

well then put in, or advocate, some spending restraint.....dont just condemn us to fiscal insanity and bankruptcy by dismissing out of hand increasing taxes on the rich...which is the only way to get us climbing our way out of this hole.

What do you think conservative fiscal policy is all about, but restraint? You have to have the intervention first, then rehab, then you can talk about getting back on your feet. Right now, Washington is in full spending addiction mode.

well True conservatives should then not focus on not raising taxes...........but focus on putting restraints on spending, and/or restricting increased taxes to pay down the debt....instead of just saying "no increased taxes"...Republicans have shown little restraint in reality...........they recently voted to ignore restrictions of funds I believe in defense spending..........

Republican =/= conservative, that's one issue right there. Then there are big government Republicans who increase spending, like George Bush did. Now defense spending is dictated by the Constitution, so many see it as a necessary thing. That is, after all, one of the federal government's mandated activities. The amount of spending is debatable, since we already spend a LOT on it.

I agree, largely......but acknowledging these facts does nothing to solve our ballooning debt.

That is correct, and that is why we WILL do nothing to resolve the debt issue until we simply can't finance it any longer and we default. Even then, I predict that there will politicians who will promise even more new spending. The dirty secret is that we already have more than enough revenue coming in to continue scheduled debt payments even if we refused to lift the debt ceiling any higher. We just choose to spend it elsewhere. Watch the election season. Every candidate is going to try to out-do all the others in promising new spending.

they NEVER DO THAT...THEY ALL PROMISE TO CUT ...yet they never cut.....and they ALL promise to cut taxes too...and they DO get that done to placATE THEIR RICH DONORS............IT HAS TO BE THE OPPOSITE , raise taxes on the rich and pay down the debt.

 

[Campbell]

We could talk about the 6,500 who died in Bush's wars, the one in Iraq(4,500 dead, 35,000 seriously wounded) totally unnecessary. The Republican party has become the party of the rich and corporations and what amazes me is that any common people actually support that bunch of dolts.

You want to talk about the fact they were all volunteers who made the choice to serve their country and go fight a war you pissed away any hopes of being worthwhile? Or the hundreds of thousands of socialist-supported thug terrorist scum they killed?

And what is your deal with the Republican party? I'm not a Republican, I am a conservative and we were talking about free market capitalism versus socialism. I actually think Bush was more Socialist than Clinton. This isn't about political parties. You've obviously hitched your wagon to a party and you want to run on the 19th century failed Socialist platform... so be it! ...Let's see who wins this baby? I'm betting America is about fed up with you.

As I've posted here repeatedly I was a Republican for thirty years. I voted for Eisenhower, Goldwater, Nixon three times and even Reagan the first time. After I saw that Hollywood actor with a numbness above the shoulders slash tax rates to pre depression lows, increase his spending and borrow three trillion dollars from foreign banks I went twenty years and didn't even show up at the polls. I've only voted Democrat 3 times in my life but I'll never vote for another Republican if I live to 100. I liked the Eisenhower era when the Republican party was still the party of the people. The only thing the modern Republican party seems to want to do is cut tax rates for the rich and declare war somewhere then send other people's kids to fight and die in it!!

Hey Numbnuts!!!! The rich send their kids to ivy league schools and the kids of poor people join the military. Can't you figure that out??

Take the Bush family....they all but owned Yale and they all attended there. Bush made C's and if he hadn't been at Yale any other school would have run the dumb son-of-a-bitch off.
His home state at University of Texas refused him admission to their law school based on academic consideration.

 

[hadit]

What do you think conservative fiscal policy is all about, but restraint? You have to have the intervention first, then rehab, then you can talk about getting back on your feet. Right now, Washington is in full spending addiction mode.

well True conservatives should then not focus on not raising taxes...........but focus on putting restraints on spending, and/or restricting increased taxes to pay down the debt....instead of just saying "no increased taxes"...Republicans have shown little restraint in reality...........they recently voted to ignore restrictions of funds I believe in defense spending..........

Republican =/= conservative, that's one issue right there. Then there are big government Republicans who increase spending, like George Bush did. Now defense spending is dictated by the Constitution, so many see it as a necessary thing. That is, after all, one of the federal government's mandated activities. The amount of spending is debatable, since we already spend a LOT on it.

I agree, largely......but acknowledging these facts does nothing to solve our ballooning debt.

That is correct, and that is why we WILL do nothing to resolve the debt issue until we simply can't finance it any longer and we default. Even then, I predict that there will politicians who will promise even more new spending. The dirty secret is that we already have more than enough revenue coming in to continue scheduled debt payments even if we refused to lift the debt ceiling any higher. We just choose to spend it elsewhere. Watch the election season. Every candidate is going to try to out-do all the others in promising new spending.

they NEVER DO THAT...THEY ALL PROMISE TO CUT ...yet they never cut.....and they ALL promise to cut taxes too...and they DO get that done to placATE THEIR RICH DONORS............IT HAS TO BE THE OPPOSITE , raise taxes on the rich and pay down the debt.

And if you include spending cuts, you'd have a lot less resistance. As it is, people rightly ask, "Why should I have to give up more out of my paycheck if you're not going to do anything about the debt?".

 

[dcraelin]

well True conservatives should then not focus on not raising taxes...........but focus on putting restraints on spending, and/or restricting increased taxes to pay down the debt....instead of just saying "no increased taxes"...Republicans have shown little restraint in reality...........they recently voted to ignore restrictions of funds I believe in defense spending..........

Republican =/= conservative, that's one issue right there. Then there are big government Republicans who increase spending, like George Bush did. Now defense spending is dictated by the Constitution, so many see it as a necessary thing. That is, after all, one of the federal government's mandated activities. The amount of spending is debatable, since we already spend a LOT on it.

I agree, largely......but acknowledging these facts does nothing to solve our ballooning debt.

That is correct, and that is why we WILL do nothing to resolve the debt issue until we simply can't finance it any longer and we default. Even then, I predict that there will politicians who will promise even more new spending. The dirty secret is that we already have more than enough revenue coming in to continue scheduled debt payments even if we refused to lift the debt ceiling any higher. We just choose to spend it elsewhere. Watch the election season. Every candidate is going to try to out-do all the others in promising new spending.

they NEVER DO THAT...THEY ALL PROMISE TO CUT ...yet they never cut.....and they ALL promise to cut taxes too...and they DO get that done to placATE THEIR RICH DONORS............IT HAS TO BE THE OPPOSITE , raise taxes on the rich and pay down the debt.

And if you include spending cuts, you'd have a lot less resistance. As it is, people rightly ask, "Why should I have to give up more out of my paycheck if you're not going to do anything about the debt?".

well spending cuts, is not necessarily needed for the government to pally tax increases to debt.....but I get your point...it would help

 

[Dad2three]

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more because the majority of them are selfish and don't care about anybody but themselves! Trust me, if you are a millionaire, it is NOT going to hurt you if you just pay a little more in taxes. I believe that if you are a good and righteous person, you would want to help the poor or people that are less fortunate. It's as simple as that! People need to stop being so selfish.

Reagan began slashing tax rates then came George W. Bush. Neither of them cut their spending a goodam dime and borrowed from foreign banks to cover the shortfall. Tax cuts for the wealthiest people in America. It's what the Republican party stands for these days, and not much more. What they did was to funnel trillions of borrowed dollars to those in our country who were already well off. It's not a military secret...it's as plain as the nose on our faces:

................................Total U S Debt............................

09/30/2009 $11,909,829,003,511.75(80% Of All Debt Across 232 Years Borrowed By Reagan And Bushes)

09/30/2008 $10,024,724,896,912.49(Times Square Debt Clock Modified To Accommodate Tens of Trillions)

09/30/2007 $9,007,653,372,262.48
09/30/2006 $8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 $7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 $7,379,052,696,330.32

09/30/2003 $6,783,231,062,743.62(Second Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2002 $6,228,235,965,597.16

09/30/2001 $5,807,463,412,200.06(First Bush Tax Cuts Enacted Using Reconciliation)

09/30/2000 $5,674,178,209,886.86(Administration And Congress Arguing About How To Use Surplus)

09/30/1999 $5,656,270,901,615.43(First Surplus Generated...On Track To Pay Off Debt By 2012)

09/30/1998 $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 $4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 $4,411,488,883,139.38 ( Debt Quadrupled By Reagan/Bush41)
09/30/1992 $4,064,620,655,521.66
09/30/1991 $3,665,303,351,697.03
09/28/1990 $3,233,313,451,777.25
09/29/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32
09/30/1988 $2,602,337,712,041.16
09/30/1987 $2,350,276,890,953.00
09/30/1986 $2,125,302,616,658.42
09/30/1985 $1,823,103,000,000.00
09/30/1984 $1,572,266,000,000.00
09/30/1983 $1,377,210,000,000.00

09/30/1982 $1,142,034,000,000.00(Total Debt Passes $1 Trillion)((Reagan Slashed Tax Rates To Pre Depression Levels)

09/30/1981 $997,855,000,000.00

Let's just make them pay 90%...

How.....?

Warren Buffet's salary is $100,000 a year. You can raise the top tax rate to 100%. He won't pay a dime more in taxes.

Zuckerberg has a salary of $1 a year. You can raise ALL taxes to 100%, and he won't pay a dime more in taxes.

You people think you can 'make' people pay taxes. Every country that has tried that, has failed.

LOOK AT WHAT EFFECTIVE RATES THE "JOB CREATORS" USED TO PAY, PRE REAGANOMICS!!

The Buffett Rule is part of a tax plan proposed by President Barack Obama in 2011.The tax plan would apply a minimum tax rate of 30 percent on individuals making more than a million dollars a year. According to a White House official, the new tax rate would directly affect 0.3 percent of taxpayers.

WEIRD THE GOP OPPOSES IT RIGHT?


Buffett Rule - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Dad2three]

Beside BS AND RIGHT WING MEMES , HOW ABOUT BACKING ANYTHING UP Bubba? lol

In 2012, 136.1 million taxpayers reported earning $9.04 trillion in adjusted gross income and paid $1.1 trillion in income taxes.

• All income groups increased their income and taxes paid over the previous year.

• The top 1 percent of taxpayers earned their largest share of income since 2007 at 21.9 percent of total AGI and paid their largest share of the income tax burden since the same year at 38.1 percent of total income taxes.

• In 2012, the top 50 percent of all taxpayers (68 million filers) paid 97.2 percent of all income taxes while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 2.8 percent.

• The top 1 percent (1.3 million filers) paid a greater share of income taxes (38.1 percent) than the bottom 90 percent (122.4 million filers) combined (29.8 percent).

• The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid a higher effective income tax rate than any other group at 22.8 percent, which is nearly 7 times higher than taxpayers in the bottom 50 percent (3.28 percent).

AND? The top 1% has TRIPLED their share of the pie since 1980, WHILE decreasing the tax "burden" on that piece of the pie since 1980!!


The one tax graph you really need to know

So here is total taxes -- which includes corporate taxes, income taxes, payroll taxes, state sales taxes, and more -- paid by different income groups and broken into federal and state and local burdens:

SEE WHAT EFFECTIVE TAX RATES WERE ON THE JOB CREATORS' PRE REAGANOMICS?

 

[Dad2three]

Let's make everyone pay 90%... starting with YOU, YOU PIECE OF SHIT.

All the way into the 1960's anyone who earned more than $300,000 a year paid 91% of the excess in taxes. 'Course back then CEO's earned 25 times what a carpenter or electrician made. Now the rich have fixed the game and they've got nearly all the money. They won't quit until America becomes a Lord/Serf society. If you count all the fees, taxes etc. that an average earner makes he, she's being taxed at twice the percentage of his/her gross income that the rich are. Payroll tax, state income tax, sales tax, federal excise tax, property tax, fees on everything from auto registration to a fishing license. The upper nuts are supposed to be paying 35%-40% but none of them do. Their lawyers and accountants see to that. I have a buddy in MS who owns a metal building construction company and he told me that if he ever had to pay more than 20% he would fire his accountant and hire a new one.

Liar.

Do you have trouble reading the English language??

CEO Pay in 2012 Was Extraordinarily High Relative to Typical Workers and Other High Earners | Economic Policy Institute

From 1978 to 2012, CEO compensation measured with options realized increased about 875 percent, a rise more than double stock market growth and substantially greater than the painfully slow 5.4 percent growth in a typical worker’s compensation over the same period.

Why no I don't. Do you? You think cutting and pasting bullshit makes you smart? FYI.. you're a dumb ass piece of shit fucking moron if you think people 1) paid 91% in taxes or 2) should pay 91% in taxes.

That's all they can do though. Leftists are generally pretty ignorant people. Cutting and pasting, is all they can do. Keep your expectations low enough, and you won't be disappointed by the left anymore.

Says the Klown arguing the US can't make people pay higher taxes, lol

 

[bedowin62]

weird; Dems didnt have the votes to overcome the republican filibuster of that Buffett rule?

 

[Dad2three]

Beside BS AND RIGHT WING MEMES , HOW ABOUT BACKING ANYTHING UP Bubba? lol

In 2012, 136.1 million taxpayers reported earning $9.04 trillion in adjusted gross income and paid $1.1 trillion in income taxes.

• All income groups increased their income and taxes paid over the previous year.

• The top 1 percent of taxpayers earned their largest share of income since 2007 at 21.9 percent of total AGI and paid their largest share of the income tax burden since the same year at 38.1 percent of total income taxes.

• In 2012, the top 50 percent of all taxpayers (68 million filers) paid 97.2 percent of all income taxes while the bottom 50 percent paid the remaining 2.8 percent.

• The top 1 percent (1.3 million filers) paid a greater share of income taxes (38.1 percent) than the bottom 90 percent (122.4 million filers) combined (29.8 percent).

• The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid a higher effective income tax rate than any other group at 22.8 percent, which is nearly 7 times higher than taxpayers in the bottom 50 percent (3.28 percent).

Dumb2three this is from your source, not mine...

Yep Bubba, The ANTI Tax Foundation showing the BOTTOM HALF OF AMERICA went from 18% of the pie in 1980 to 11% today, an AVERAGE of less than $15,000 PER FAMILY, a drop of nearly $5,000 PER FAMILY since Reaganomics. Go figure the ANTI Tax Foundation sticks with the 46% of federal tax burden, the income tax, lol



Let's make sure the BOTTOM half US step up and pay more right? lol