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

[bripat9643]

Third world nations have never had economic freedom, dipstick. That's why they are third world.

WHICH ONE YOU WANT THE US TO LOOK LIKE BUBBA?


Index of Economic Freedom

7 Chile
22 Georgia
24 Czech Republic
10 Mauritius
25 United Arab Emirates
28 Colombia
14 Taiwan
15 Lithuania
32 Qatar
18 Bahrain
19 Finland
34 Macau
36 Botswana
37 Latvia
65 Rwanda
38 Jordan
66 Montenegro
39 Brunei Darussalam
67 Trinidad and Tobago

68 Panama
69 Kazakhstan
70 Turkey
43 Uruguay
71 Ghana
44 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
72 South Africa
46 Barbados
74 Kuwait
47 Peru
75 Thailand
48 Jamaica
76 Philippines
77 Saudi Arabia
50 Slovakia
79 Madagascar
52 Armenia
53 Macedonia
81 Croatia
54 Hungary
82 Kyrgyz Republic
55 Bulgaria
83 Paraguay
56 Oman
84 Vanuatu
57 Romania
85 Azerbaijan
58 Malta
59 Mexico
87 Guatemala
60 Cabo Verde
62 El Salvador
90 Serbia
63 Albania

Country Rankings: World & Global Economy Rankings on Economic Freedom

it's curious that you were afraid to include all the top countries on the list, don't you think? BTW, before the Obama administration, the USA was ranked #4 on this list.

1 Hong Kong
2 Singapore
3 New Zealand
4 Australia
5 Switzerland
6 Canada
7 Chile
8 Estonia
9 Ireland
10 Mauritius
11 Denmark
12 United States
13 United Kingdom
14 Taiwan
15 Lithuania
16 Germany
17 The Netherlands
18 Bahrain
19 Finland
20 Japan
21 Luxembourg

Before Obama right wing H/F had US at #4? Doubtful LINKIE?

So you don't want to provide one of those nations I gave you want to emulate Bubs?

I wouldn't mind it if we emulated Chile, but the other countries are far down the list of economic freedom. I would prefer Chile under Pinochet to American under Obama.

Good, Uncle Milties lab test


CHILE: THE LABORATORY TEST

Many people have often wondered what it would be like to create a nation based solely on their political and economic beliefs. Imagine: no opposition, no political rivals, no compromise of morals. Only a "benevolent dictator," if you will, setting up society according to your ideals.

The Chicago School of Economics got that chance for 16 years in Chile, under near-laboratory conditions. Between 1973 and 1989, a government team of economists trained at the University of Chicago dismantled or decentralized the Chilean state as far as was humanly possible. Their program included privatizing welfare and social programs, deregulating the market, liberalizing trade, rolling back trade unions, and rewriting its constitution and laws. And they did all this in the absence of the far-right's most hated institution: democracy.

The results were exactly what liberals predicted

Chile's economy became more unstable than any other in Latin America, alternately experiencing deep plunges and soaring growth. Once all this erratic behavior was averaged out, however, Chile's growth during this 16-year period was one of the slowest of any Latin American country. Worse, income inequality grew severe. The majority of workers actually earned less in 1989 than in 1973 (after adjusting for inflation), while the incomes of the rich skyrocketed. In the absence of market regulations, Chile also became one of the most polluted countries in Latin America. And Chile's lack of democracy was only possible by suppressing political opposition and labor unions under a reign of terror and widespread human rights abuses.

Conservatives have developed an apologist literature defending Chile as a huge success story....



Chile: the laboratory test


WANT TO TRY AGAIN BUBS?

What utter tripe. In case you don't remember, the entire world was going through quite a bit of economic instability, including to major oil shocks and a major recession.

Chile has become the wealthiest country in Latin America.

Ya, that outcome really sucks for socialists, doesn't it?

 

[bripat9643]

Do you support government bailouts of the wealthy or not?

Fuk no, BUT I also support GOOD GOV'T REGULATION AND REGULATORS ON THE BEAT TO STOP WHAT HAPPENED UNDER HARDING/COOLIDGE, RONNIE AND DUBYA!

The phrase "GOOD GOV'T REGULATION AND REGULATORS" is any oxymoron.

It is when the GOP's in charge alright

It's always an oxymoron. Even more so when Democrats are in charge.

Name the banking collapse under a Dem Prez Bubs? Oops

Pubs always get stuck with the hangover from the Dims alcohol binge.

 

[Dad2three]

WHICH ONE YOU WANT THE US TO LOOK LIKE BUBBA?


Index of Economic Freedom

7 Chile
22 Georgia
24 Czech Republic
10 Mauritius
25 United Arab Emirates
28 Colombia
14 Taiwan
15 Lithuania
32 Qatar
18 Bahrain
19 Finland
34 Macau
36 Botswana
37 Latvia
65 Rwanda
38 Jordan
66 Montenegro
39 Brunei Darussalam
67 Trinidad and Tobago

68 Panama
69 Kazakhstan
70 Turkey
43 Uruguay
71 Ghana
44 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
72 South Africa
46 Barbados
74 Kuwait
47 Peru
75 Thailand
48 Jamaica
76 Philippines
77 Saudi Arabia
50 Slovakia
79 Madagascar
52 Armenia
53 Macedonia
81 Croatia
54 Hungary
82 Kyrgyz Republic
55 Bulgaria
83 Paraguay
56 Oman
84 Vanuatu
57 Romania
85 Azerbaijan
58 Malta
59 Mexico
87 Guatemala
60 Cabo Verde
62 El Salvador
90 Serbia
63 Albania

Country Rankings: World & Global Economy Rankings on Economic Freedom

it's curious that you were afraid to include all the top countries on the list, don't you think? BTW, before the Obama administration, the USA was ranked #4 on this list.

1 Hong Kong
2 Singapore
3 New Zealand
4 Australia
5 Switzerland
6 Canada
7 Chile
8 Estonia
9 Ireland
10 Mauritius
11 Denmark
12 United States
13 United Kingdom
14 Taiwan
15 Lithuania
16 Germany
17 The Netherlands
18 Bahrain
19 Finland
20 Japan
21 Luxembourg

Before Obama right wing H/F had US at #4? Doubtful LINKIE?

So you don't want to provide one of those nations I gave you want to emulate Bubs?

I wouldn't mind it if we emulated Chile, but the other countries are far down the list of economic freedom. I would prefer Chile under Pinochet to American under Obama.

Good, Uncle Milties lab test


CHILE: THE LABORATORY TEST

Many people have often wondered what it would be like to create a nation based solely on their political and economic beliefs. Imagine: no opposition, no political rivals, no compromise of morals. Only a "benevolent dictator," if you will, setting up society according to your ideals.

The Chicago School of Economics got that chance for 16 years in Chile, under near-laboratory conditions. Between 1973 and 1989, a government team of economists trained at the University of Chicago dismantled or decentralized the Chilean state as far as was humanly possible. Their program included privatizing welfare and social programs, deregulating the market, liberalizing trade, rolling back trade unions, and rewriting its constitution and laws. And they did all this in the absence of the far-right's most hated institution: democracy.

The results were exactly what liberals predicted

Chile's economy became more unstable than any other in Latin America, alternately experiencing deep plunges and soaring growth. Once all this erratic behavior was averaged out, however, Chile's growth during this 16-year period was one of the slowest of any Latin American country. Worse, income inequality grew severe. The majority of workers actually earned less in 1989 than in 1973 (after adjusting for inflation), while the incomes of the rich skyrocketed. In the absence of market regulations, Chile also became one of the most polluted countries in Latin America. And Chile's lack of democracy was only possible by suppressing political opposition and labor unions under a reign of terror and widespread human rights abuses.

Conservatives have developed an apologist literature defending Chile as a huge success story....



Chile: the laboratory test


WANT TO TRY AGAIN BUBS?

What utter tripe. In case you don't remember, the entire world was going through quite a bit of economic instability, including to major oil shocks and a major recession.

Chile has become the wealthiest country in Latin America.

Ya, that outcome really sucks for socialists, doesn't it?

YET CHILE WAS AT THE BOTTOM. Weird right?


1973-1989 the world went through instability???? lol

 

[Dad2three]

Fuk no, BUT I also support GOOD GOV'T REGULATION AND REGULATORS ON THE BEAT TO STOP WHAT HAPPENED UNDER HARDING/COOLIDGE, RONNIE AND DUBYA!

The phrase "GOOD GOV'T REGULATION AND REGULATORS" is any oxymoron.

It is when the GOP's in charge alright

It's always an oxymoron. Even more so when Democrats are in charge.

Name the banking collapse under a Dem Prez Bubs? Oops

Pubs always get stuck with the hangover from the Dims alcohol binge.

Want to back up your crap, EVER Bubba?

 

[Dad2three]

WHICH ONE YOU WANT THE US TO LOOK LIKE BUBBA?


Index of Economic Freedom

7 Chile
22 Georgia
24 Czech Republic
10 Mauritius
25 United Arab Emirates
28 Colombia
14 Taiwan
15 Lithuania
32 Qatar
18 Bahrain
19 Finland
34 Macau
36 Botswana
37 Latvia
65 Rwanda
38 Jordan
66 Montenegro
39 Brunei Darussalam
67 Trinidad and Tobago

68 Panama
69 Kazakhstan
70 Turkey
43 Uruguay
71 Ghana
44 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
72 South Africa
46 Barbados
74 Kuwait
47 Peru
75 Thailand
48 Jamaica
76 Philippines
77 Saudi Arabia
50 Slovakia
79 Madagascar
52 Armenia
53 Macedonia
81 Croatia
54 Hungary
82 Kyrgyz Republic
55 Bulgaria
83 Paraguay
56 Oman
84 Vanuatu
57 Romania
85 Azerbaijan
58 Malta
59 Mexico
87 Guatemala
60 Cabo Verde
62 El Salvador
90 Serbia
63 Albania

Country Rankings: World & Global Economy Rankings on Economic Freedom

it's curious that you were afraid to include all the top countries on the list, don't you think? BTW, before the Obama administration, the USA was ranked #4 on this list.

1 Hong Kong
2 Singapore
3 New Zealand
4 Australia
5 Switzerland
6 Canada
7 Chile
8 Estonia
9 Ireland
10 Mauritius
11 Denmark
12 United States
13 United Kingdom
14 Taiwan
15 Lithuania
16 Germany
17 The Netherlands
18 Bahrain
19 Finland
20 Japan
21 Luxembourg

Before Obama right wing H/F had US at #4? Doubtful LINKIE?

So you don't want to provide one of those nations I gave you want to emulate Bubs?

I wouldn't mind it if we emulated Chile, but the other countries are far down the list of economic freedom. I would prefer Chile under Pinochet to American under Obama.

Good, Uncle Milties lab test


CHILE: THE LABORATORY TEST

Many people have often wondered what it would be like to create a nation based solely on their political and economic beliefs. Imagine: no opposition, no political rivals, no compromise of morals. Only a "benevolent dictator," if you will, setting up society according to your ideals.

The Chicago School of Economics got that chance for 16 years in Chile, under near-laboratory conditions. Between 1973 and 1989, a government team of economists trained at the University of Chicago dismantled or decentralized the Chilean state as far as was humanly possible. Their program included privatizing welfare and social programs, deregulating the market, liberalizing trade, rolling back trade unions, and rewriting its constitution and laws. And they did all this in the absence of the far-right's most hated institution: democracy.

The results were exactly what liberals predicted

Chile's economy became more unstable than any other in Latin America, alternately experiencing deep plunges and soaring growth. Once all this erratic behavior was averaged out, however, Chile's growth during this 16-year period was one of the slowest of any Latin American country. Worse, income inequality grew severe. The majority of workers actually earned less in 1989 than in 1973 (after adjusting for inflation), while the incomes of the rich skyrocketed. In the absence of market regulations, Chile also became one of the most polluted countries in Latin America. And Chile's lack of democracy was only possible by suppressing political opposition and labor unions under a reign of terror and widespread human rights abuses.

Conservatives have developed an apologist literature defending Chile as a huge success story....



Chile: the laboratory test


WANT TO TRY AGAIN BUBS?

What utter tripe. In case you don't remember, the entire world was going through quite a bit of economic instability, including to major oil shocks and a major recession.

Chile has become the wealthiest country in Latin America.

Ya, that outcome really sucks for socialists, doesn't it?

Wealthiest? oH Right, since they got rid of that Randian BS and started GOOD GOV'T POLICY ??? lol

 

[Jackson]

I can go along with taxing the rich somewhat higher but not so high, they leave the country. At the same time, I think everyone should have some skin in the game. Everyone pays!! Including those on welfare. All they have to pay is 15%, the minimum. No deductions.

 

[Dad2three]

I can go along with taxing the rich somewhat higher but not so high, they leave the country. At the same time, I think everyone should have some skin in the game. Everyone pays!! Including those on welfare. All they have to pay is 15%, the minimum. No deductions.

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:

As you can see, the poorer you are, the more state and local taxes bite into your income. As you get richer, those taxes recede, and you're mainly getting hit be federal taxes. So that's another lesson: When you omit state and local taxes from your analysis, you're omitting the taxes that hit lower-income taxpayers hardest.

But here is really the only tax graph you need: It's total tax burden by income group. And as you'll see, every income group is paying something, and the rich aren't paying much more, as a percentage of their incomes, then the middle class.

That's really what the American tax system looks like: Not 47 percent paying nothing, but everybody paying something, and most Americans paying between 25 percent and 30 percent of their income -- which is, by the way, a lot more the 13.9 percent Mitt Romney paid in 2011*.

The one tax graph you really need to know


BOTTOM 50% (HALF) OF AMERICAN'S WHO FILE INCOME TAX RETURNS, AVERAGE LESS THAN $15,000 PER FAMILY!!!


Top 1/10th of 1% of US make about the same amount as those bottom 50% of US!

 

[Dad2three]

WHICH ONE YOU WANT THE US TO LOOK LIKE BUBBA?


Index of Economic Freedom

7 Chile
22 Georgia
24 Czech Republic
10 Mauritius
25 United Arab Emirates
28 Colombia
14 Taiwan
15 Lithuania
32 Qatar
18 Bahrain
19 Finland
34 Macau
36 Botswana
37 Latvia
65 Rwanda
38 Jordan
66 Montenegro
39 Brunei Darussalam
67 Trinidad and Tobago

68 Panama
69 Kazakhstan
70 Turkey
43 Uruguay
71 Ghana
44 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
72 South Africa
46 Barbados
74 Kuwait
47 Peru
75 Thailand
48 Jamaica
76 Philippines
77 Saudi Arabia
50 Slovakia
79 Madagascar
52 Armenia
53 Macedonia
81 Croatia
54 Hungary
82 Kyrgyz Republic
55 Bulgaria
83 Paraguay
56 Oman
84 Vanuatu
57 Romania
85 Azerbaijan
58 Malta
59 Mexico
87 Guatemala
60 Cabo Verde
62 El Salvador
90 Serbia
63 Albania

Country Rankings: World & Global Economy Rankings on Economic Freedom

it's curious that you were afraid to include all the top countries on the list, don't you think? BTW, before the Obama administration, the USA was ranked #4 on this list.

1 Hong Kong
2 Singapore
3 New Zealand
4 Australia
5 Switzerland
6 Canada
7 Chile
8 Estonia
9 Ireland
10 Mauritius
11 Denmark
12 United States
13 United Kingdom
14 Taiwan
15 Lithuania
16 Germany
17 The Netherlands
18 Bahrain
19 Finland
20 Japan
21 Luxembourg

Before Obama right wing H/F had US at #4? Doubtful LINKIE?

So you don't want to provide one of those nations I gave you want to emulate Bubs?

I wouldn't mind it if we emulated Chile, but the other countries are far down the list of economic freedom. I would prefer Chile under Pinochet to American under Obama.

Good, Uncle Milties lab test


CHILE: THE LABORATORY TEST

Many people have often wondered what it would be like to create a nation based solely on their political and economic beliefs. Imagine: no opposition, no political rivals, no compromise of morals. Only a "benevolent dictator," if you will, setting up society according to your ideals.

The Chicago School of Economics got that chance for 16 years in Chile, under near-laboratory conditions. Between 1973 and 1989, a government team of economists trained at the University of Chicago dismantled or decentralized the Chilean state as far as was humanly possible. Their program included privatizing welfare and social programs, deregulating the market, liberalizing trade, rolling back trade unions, and rewriting its constitution and laws. And they did all this in the absence of the far-right's most hated institution: democracy.

The results were exactly what liberals predicted

Chile's economy became more unstable than any other in Latin America, alternately experiencing deep plunges and soaring growth. Once all this erratic behavior was averaged out, however, Chile's growth during this 16-year period was one of the slowest of any Latin American country. Worse, income inequality grew severe. The majority of workers actually earned less in 1989 than in 1973 (after adjusting for inflation), while the incomes of the rich skyrocketed. In the absence of market regulations, Chile also became one of the most polluted countries in Latin America. And Chile's lack of democracy was only possible by suppressing political opposition and labor unions under a reign of terror and widespread human rights abuses.

Conservatives have developed an apologist literature defending Chile as a huge success story....



Chile: the laboratory test


WANT TO TRY AGAIN BUBS?

What utter tripe. In case you don't remember, the entire world was going through quite a bit of economic instability, including to major oil shocks and a major recession.

Chile has become the wealthiest country in Latin America.

Ya, that outcome really sucks for socialists, doesn't it?

YOOHOO Bubba, you going to give me ONE state or nation to EVER use your Randian fetishists crap anytime? lol

 

[bripat9643]

it's curious that you were afraid to include all the top countries on the list, don't you think? BTW, before the Obama administration, the USA was ranked #4 on this list.

1 Hong Kong
2 Singapore
3 New Zealand
4 Australia
5 Switzerland
6 Canada
7 Chile
8 Estonia
9 Ireland
10 Mauritius
11 Denmark
12 United States
13 United Kingdom
14 Taiwan
15 Lithuania
16 Germany
17 The Netherlands
18 Bahrain
19 Finland
20 Japan
21 Luxembourg

Before Obama right wing H/F had US at #4? Doubtful LINKIE?

So you don't want to provide one of those nations I gave you want to emulate Bubs?

I wouldn't mind it if we emulated Chile, but the other countries are far down the list of economic freedom. I would prefer Chile under Pinochet to American under Obama.

Good, Uncle Milties lab test


CHILE: THE LABORATORY TEST

Many people have often wondered what it would be like to create a nation based solely on their political and economic beliefs. Imagine: no opposition, no political rivals, no compromise of morals. Only a "benevolent dictator," if you will, setting up society according to your ideals.

The Chicago School of Economics got that chance for 16 years in Chile, under near-laboratory conditions. Between 1973 and 1989, a government team of economists trained at the University of Chicago dismantled or decentralized the Chilean state as far as was humanly possible. Their program included privatizing welfare and social programs, deregulating the market, liberalizing trade, rolling back trade unions, and rewriting its constitution and laws. And they did all this in the absence of the far-right's most hated institution: democracy.

The results were exactly what liberals predicted

Chile's economy became more unstable than any other in Latin America, alternately experiencing deep plunges and soaring growth. Once all this erratic behavior was averaged out, however, Chile's growth during this 16-year period was one of the slowest of any Latin American country. Worse, income inequality grew severe. The majority of workers actually earned less in 1989 than in 1973 (after adjusting for inflation), while the incomes of the rich skyrocketed. In the absence of market regulations, Chile also became one of the most polluted countries in Latin America. And Chile's lack of democracy was only possible by suppressing political opposition and labor unions under a reign of terror and widespread human rights abuses.

Conservatives have developed an apologist literature defending Chile as a huge success story....



Chile: the laboratory test


WANT TO TRY AGAIN BUBS?

What utter tripe. In case you don't remember, the entire world was going through quite a bit of economic instability, including to major oil shocks and a major recession.

Chile has become the wealthiest country in Latin America.

Ya, that outcome really sucks for socialists, doesn't it?

YET CHILE WAS AT THE BOTTOM. Weird right?


1973-1989 the world went through instability???? lol

At the bottom of what?

GDP per capital in terms of Purchasing Power Parity

Trinidad and Tobago 32,346.41

The Bahamas 31,793.62

Chile 24,170.03

Antigua and Barbuda 23,071.33

Argentina 22,459.00

Panama 21,634.56

Uruguay 21,387.31

Saint Kitts and Nevis 21,073.34

Mexico 18,370.00

Peru 17,787.39

Suriname 17,502.96

Barbados 16,500.31
Brazil 15,941.00

Costa Rica 15,534.03

Colombia 14,164.43

Dominican Republic 13,347.97

Venezuela 12,638.84

Grenada 12,091.83

Ecuador 11,839.19

Saint Lucia 11,432.50

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 11,380.20

Dominica 11,029.40

Jamaica 8,941.65

El Salvador 8,777.6

Paraguay 8,776.30
Belize 8,338.99
Guatemala 7,704.20
Guyana 7,279.77
Bolivia 6,530.17
Nicaragua 5,018.76
Honduras 4,849.30
Haiti 1,846.12

 

[bripat9643]

it's curious that you were afraid to include all the top countries on the list, don't you think? BTW, before the Obama administration, the USA was ranked #4 on this list.

1 Hong Kong
2 Singapore
3 New Zealand
4 Australia
5 Switzerland
6 Canada
7 Chile
8 Estonia
9 Ireland
10 Mauritius
11 Denmark
12 United States
13 United Kingdom
14 Taiwan
15 Lithuania
16 Germany
17 The Netherlands
18 Bahrain
19 Finland
20 Japan
21 Luxembourg

Before Obama right wing H/F had US at #4? Doubtful LINKIE?

So you don't want to provide one of those nations I gave you want to emulate Bubs?

I wouldn't mind it if we emulated Chile, but the other countries are far down the list of economic freedom. I would prefer Chile under Pinochet to American under Obama.

Good, Uncle Milties lab test


CHILE: THE LABORATORY TEST

Many people have often wondered what it would be like to create a nation based solely on their political and economic beliefs. Imagine: no opposition, no political rivals, no compromise of morals. Only a "benevolent dictator," if you will, setting up society according to your ideals.

The Chicago School of Economics got that chance for 16 years in Chile, under near-laboratory conditions. Between 1973 and 1989, a government team of economists trained at the University of Chicago dismantled or decentralized the Chilean state as far as was humanly possible. Their program included privatizing welfare and social programs, deregulating the market, liberalizing trade, rolling back trade unions, and rewriting its constitution and laws. And they did all this in the absence of the far-right's most hated institution: democracy.

The results were exactly what liberals predicted

Chile's economy became more unstable than any other in Latin America, alternately experiencing deep plunges and soaring growth. Once all this erratic behavior was averaged out, however, Chile's growth during this 16-year period was one of the slowest of any Latin American country. Worse, income inequality grew severe. The majority of workers actually earned less in 1989 than in 1973 (after adjusting for inflation), while the incomes of the rich skyrocketed. In the absence of market regulations, Chile also became one of the most polluted countries in Latin America. And Chile's lack of democracy was only possible by suppressing political opposition and labor unions under a reign of terror and widespread human rights abuses.

Conservatives have developed an apologist literature defending Chile as a huge success story....



Chile: the laboratory test


WANT TO TRY AGAIN BUBS?

What utter tripe. In case you don't remember, the entire world was going through quite a bit of economic instability, including to major oil shocks and a major recession.

Chile has become the wealthiest country in Latin America.

Ya, that outcome really sucks for socialists, doesn't it?

YOOHOO Bubba, you going to give me ONE state or nation to EVER use your Randian fetishists crap anytime? lol

I already did, moron.

 

[Jackson]

I can go along with taxing the rich somewhat higher but not so high, they leave the country. At the same time, I think everyone should have some skin in the game. Everyone pays!! Including those on welfare. All they have to pay is 15%, the minimum. No deductions.

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:

As you can see, the poorer you are, the more state and local taxes bite into your income. As you get richer, those taxes recede, and you're mainly getting hit be federal taxes. So that's another lesson: When you omit state and local taxes from your analysis, you're omitting the taxes that hit lower-income taxpayers hardest.

But here is really the only tax graph you need: It's total tax burden by income group. And as you'll see, every income group is paying something, and the rich aren't paying much more, as a percentage of their incomes, then the middle class.

That's really what the American tax system looks like: Not 47 percent paying nothing, but everybody paying something, and most Americans paying between 25 percent and 30 percent of their income -- which is, by the way, a lot more the 13.9 percent Mitt Romney paid in 2011*.

The one tax graph you really need to know


BOTTOM 50% (HALF) OF AMERICAN'S WHO FILE INCOME TAX RETURNS, AVERAGE LESS THAN $15,000 PER FAMILY!!!


Top 1/10th of 1% of US make about the same amount as those bottom 50% of US!

I'm talking about Federal income tax. Not sales tax, No state tax for anyone.

 

[Dad2three]

Before Obama right wing H/F had US at #4? Doubtful LINKIE?

So you don't want to provide one of those nations I gave you want to emulate Bubs?

I wouldn't mind it if we emulated Chile, but the other countries are far down the list of economic freedom. I would prefer Chile under Pinochet to American under Obama.

Good, Uncle Milties lab test


CHILE: THE LABORATORY TEST

Many people have often wondered what it would be like to create a nation based solely on their political and economic beliefs. Imagine: no opposition, no political rivals, no compromise of morals. Only a "benevolent dictator," if you will, setting up society according to your ideals.

The Chicago School of Economics got that chance for 16 years in Chile, under near-laboratory conditions. Between 1973 and 1989, a government team of economists trained at the University of Chicago dismantled or decentralized the Chilean state as far as was humanly possible. Their program included privatizing welfare and social programs, deregulating the market, liberalizing trade, rolling back trade unions, and rewriting its constitution and laws. And they did all this in the absence of the far-right's most hated institution: democracy.

The results were exactly what liberals predicted

Chile's economy became more unstable than any other in Latin America, alternately experiencing deep plunges and soaring growth. Once all this erratic behavior was averaged out, however, Chile's growth during this 16-year period was one of the slowest of any Latin American country. Worse, income inequality grew severe. The majority of workers actually earned less in 1989 than in 1973 (after adjusting for inflation), while the incomes of the rich skyrocketed. In the absence of market regulations, Chile also became one of the most polluted countries in Latin America. And Chile's lack of democracy was only possible by suppressing political opposition and labor unions under a reign of terror and widespread human rights abuses.

Conservatives have developed an apologist literature defending Chile as a huge success story....



Chile: the laboratory test


WANT TO TRY AGAIN BUBS?

What utter tripe. In case you don't remember, the entire world was going through quite a bit of economic instability, including to major oil shocks and a major recession.

Chile has become the wealthiest country in Latin America.

Ya, that outcome really sucks for socialists, doesn't it?

YOOHOO Bubba, you going to give me ONE state or nation to EVER use your Randian fetishists crap anytime? lol

I already did, moron.

Oh right, the US which used VERY heavy protectionists policy from our Founding until the 1970's... OOOPS

 

[Dad2three]

Before Obama right wing H/F had US at #4? Doubtful LINKIE?

So you don't want to provide one of those nations I gave you want to emulate Bubs?

I wouldn't mind it if we emulated Chile, but the other countries are far down the list of economic freedom. I would prefer Chile under Pinochet to American under Obama.

Good, Uncle Milties lab test


CHILE: THE LABORATORY TEST

Many people have often wondered what it would be like to create a nation based solely on their political and economic beliefs. Imagine: no opposition, no political rivals, no compromise of morals. Only a "benevolent dictator," if you will, setting up society according to your ideals.

The Chicago School of Economics got that chance for 16 years in Chile, under near-laboratory conditions. Between 1973 and 1989, a government team of economists trained at the University of Chicago dismantled or decentralized the Chilean state as far as was humanly possible. Their program included privatizing welfare and social programs, deregulating the market, liberalizing trade, rolling back trade unions, and rewriting its constitution and laws. And they did all this in the absence of the far-right's most hated institution: democracy.

The results were exactly what liberals predicted

Chile's economy became more unstable than any other in Latin America, alternately experiencing deep plunges and soaring growth. Once all this erratic behavior was averaged out, however, Chile's growth during this 16-year period was one of the slowest of any Latin American country. Worse, income inequality grew severe. The majority of workers actually earned less in 1989 than in 1973 (after adjusting for inflation), while the incomes of the rich skyrocketed. In the absence of market regulations, Chile also became one of the most polluted countries in Latin America. And Chile's lack of democracy was only possible by suppressing political opposition and labor unions under a reign of terror and widespread human rights abuses.

Conservatives have developed an apologist literature defending Chile as a huge success story....



Chile: the laboratory test


WANT TO TRY AGAIN BUBS?

What utter tripe. In case you don't remember, the entire world was going through quite a bit of economic instability, including to major oil shocks and a major recession.

Chile has become the wealthiest country in Latin America.

Ya, that outcome really sucks for socialists, doesn't it?

YET CHILE WAS AT THE BOTTOM. Weird right?


1973-1989 the world went through instability???? lol

At the bottom of what?

GDP per capital in terms of Purchasing Power Parity

Trinidad and Tobago 32,346.41

The Bahamas 31,793.62

Chile 24,170.03

Antigua and Barbuda 23,071.33

Argentina 22,459.00

Panama 21,634.56

Uruguay 21,387.31

Saint Kitts and Nevis 21,073.34

Mexico 18,370.00

Peru 17,787.39

Suriname 17,502.96

Barbados 16,500.31
Brazil 15,941.00

Costa Rica 15,534.03

Colombia 14,164.43

Dominican Republic 13,347.97

Venezuela 12,638.84

Grenada 12,091.83

Ecuador 11,839.19

Saint Lucia 11,432.50

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 11,380.20

Dominica 11,029.40

Jamaica 8,941.65

El Salvador 8,777.6

Paraguay 8,776.30
Belize 8,338.99
Guatemala 7,704.20
Guyana 7,279.77
Bolivia 6,530.17
Nicaragua 5,018.76
Honduras 4,849.30
Haiti 1,846.12

What's THAT got to do with ANYTHING dumbass? It sure doesn't prove YOUR posit that Chile was a success 1973-1989 during that "world wide" downturn, lol

 

[Dad2three]

I can go along with taxing the rich somewhat higher but not so high, they leave the country. At the same time, I think everyone should have some skin in the game. Everyone pays!! Including those on welfare. All they have to pay is 15%, the minimum. No deductions.

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:

As you can see, the poorer you are, the more state and local taxes bite into your income. As you get richer, those taxes recede, and you're mainly getting hit be federal taxes. So that's another lesson: When you omit state and local taxes from your analysis, you're omitting the taxes that hit lower-income taxpayers hardest.

But here is really the only tax graph you need: It's total tax burden by income group. And as you'll see, every income group is paying something, and the rich aren't paying much more, as a percentage of their incomes, then the middle class.

That's really what the American tax system looks like: Not 47 percent paying nothing, but everybody paying something, and most Americans paying between 25 percent and 30 percent of their income -- which is, by the way, a lot more the 13.9 percent Mitt Romney paid in 2011*.

The one tax graph you really need to know


BOTTOM 50% (HALF) OF AMERICAN'S WHO FILE INCOME TAX RETURNS, AVERAGE LESS THAN $15,000 PER FAMILY!!!


Top 1/10th of 1% of US make about the same amount as those bottom 50% of US!

I'm talking about Federal income tax. Not sales tax, No state tax for anyone.

Silly me, of course why not cherry pick that 26% of ALL Gov't taxes and focus on that, after all the bottom half of US who AVERAGE LESS THAN $15,000 PER FAMILY (a drop of near;ly $5,000 per family from 1980, pre Reaganomics) , are just living the life of luxury on our hammocks right?


After all ONLY Fed income taxes run Gov't right?

 

[danielpalos]

of Course capitalists should taxed according to their capital under any form of capitalism. only false capitalists believe otherwise.

 

[thanatos144]

of Course capitalists should taxed according to their capital under any form of capitalism. only false capitalists believe otherwise.

Dummy my money is mine not your's . All tax on income and production is wrong. but you idiot socialists don't understand that. To busy worrying about who will pay for killing babies

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

 

[Dad2three]

of Course capitalists should taxed according to their capital under any form of capitalism. only false capitalists believe otherwise.

Dummy my money is mine not your's . All tax on income and production is wrong. but you idiot socialists don't understand that. To busy worrying about who will pay for killing babies

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

"All tax on income and production is wrong"


ACCORDING TO WHOM DUMBASS?


A Tax System Stacked Against the 99 Percent


LEONA HELMSLEY, the hotel chain executive who was convicted of federal tax evasion in 1989, was notorious for, among other things, reportedly having said that “only the little people pay taxes.”

As a statement of principle, the quotation may well have earned Mrs. Helmsley, who died in 2007, the title Queen of Mean. But as a prediction about the fairness of American tax policy, Mrs. Helmsley’s remark might actually have been prescient.

Today, the deadline for filing individual income-tax returns, is a day when Americans would do well to pause and reflect on our tax system and the society it creates. No one enjoys paying taxes, and yet all but the extreme libertarians agree, as Oliver Wendell Holmes said, that taxes are the price we pay for civilized society. But in recent decades, the burden for paying that price has been distributed in increasingly unfair ways.

About 6 in 10 of us believe that the tax system is unfair — and they’re right: put simply, the very rich don’t pay their fair share. The richest 400 individual taxpayers, with an average income of more than $200 million, pay less than 20 percent of their income in taxes — far lower than mere millionaires, who pay about 25 percent of their income in taxes, and about the same as those earning a mere $200,000 to $500,000. And in 2009, 116 of the top 400 earners — almost a third — paid less than 15 percent of their income in taxes.

Conservatives like to point out that the richest Americans’ tax payments make up a large portion of total receipts. This is true, as well it should be in any tax system that is progressive — that is, a system that taxes the affluent at higher rates than those of modest means. It’s also true that as the wealthiest Americans’ incomes have skyrocketed in recent years, their total tax payments have grown. This would be so even if we had a single flat income-tax rate across the board.

What should shock and outrage us is that as the top 1 percent has grown extremely rich, the effective tax rates they pay have markedly decreased. Our tax system is much less progressive than it was for much of the 20th century.


Tax fairness has gotten much worse in the 30 years since the Reagan “revolution” of the 1980s.

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/14/a-tax-system-stacked-against-the-99-percent/?_r=0

 

[danielpalos]

of Course capitalists should taxed according to their capital under any form of capitalism. only false capitalists believe otherwise.

Dummy my money is mine not your's . All tax on income and production is wrong. but you idiot socialists don't understand that. To busy worrying about who will pay for killing babies

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

it is Only yours to a certain extent. in any case, why not quit your day job if socialism is too much hard work for lazy capitalists.

 

[danielpalos]

yet, now many People want to end our wars on crime, drugs, poverty, and terror to end our income tax.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Just a real quick input then you all can go back to attacking each other. I spent 5 1/2 years over in Saudi Arabia as a contractor working on the S.A. F-15s. Up to 70k dollars it was tax free except that I had to pay S.S. which was required. Any monies earned over that 70K was going to be taxed at the U.S. rate. So I made sure I didn't go over the 70k. But then I did have a 10k deduction for having my family over there, so I took 10k of stock profit burned it off, claimed it on my 1040 and after 3 years, used up 30k of profits for about 600 dollars. Was this a bad thing I did, or did I follow the LAW, and used what I knew to my benefit? For I was wrong, then you can bet Bill Gates(Liberal) Warren Buffet(Liberal), Al Gore(Liberal) and any other liberal elite has done wrong, worse than me, yet you dumbasses keep voting for them.

You mean you didn't pay Saudi's 0% personal income tax rate? lol

Even though the IRS mandates every taxpayer to report international income, it also allows for various deductions which lessen the impact of US income tax liability. The primary deductions which help to prevent double taxation and reduce the taxes you owe in the US are:

• FEIE (Foreign Earned Income Exclusion) – Allows US expats to deduct up to $92,900 of all foreign earned income from US taxable income.
• FTC (Foreign Tax Credit) – Allows US expats to clam a dollar for dollar credit against their US expat tax return for foreign taxes paid to the host country.
• Foreign Housing Deduction – Allows US expats to deduct qualifying housing costs incurred by moving and living overseas

If you take advantage of these deductions when filing a US expat tax return, you may be able to escape all tax liability with the United States. It’s important to understand, however, that even if you wind up owing nothing to the US after having taken all the deductions available to you, you are still required to file a US expat tax return

US Expat Tax Considerations for Americans Working in Saudi Arabia



Bill Gates and Warren Buffet? Oh right the guys giving away their wealth, unlike the CONservatives Koch brothers/Walton's!

Bill Gates and Warren Buffet? Oh right the guys giving away their wealth, unlike the CONservatives Koch brothers/Walton's!

Did you know that Warren Buffet(who pays less taxes than his secretary) denied the union middleclass jobs, because he opposed the Keystone Pipeline, so HIS railroads could continue bringing the oil from Canada to the gulf? Bet you didn't know that. Did you know that Bill Gates, is wanting cheap labor from India because Americans are paid too much for the same work? Oh you didn't know that. The liberals always talk about their "COMPASSION", but as long as the liberal elites are in for the fight, they can screw over America, and their low information useful idiots, just adore them. Oh well, stupid is as stupid votes, and Bill Gates, and Warren Buffet has made more billions since Obama took office, who has now got more people in poverty in the history of America. Slap yourselves on the back, you "HAVE" fundamentally transformed America, into the 3rd world nation, you love so much.

Did you know that Warren Buffet(who pays less taxes than his secretary)

He lies!!!