Why do democrats hate poor black people and want them permanently on welfare?

[danielpalos]

The 1% have nothing to do with what they are forced to pay in taxes. Like most people, I'm sure they do what they can to pay the least, but you have to obey the law.

Just like the bottom 45% of our country that pay no income taxes at all. It's not being slick, clever, or creative, they just don't have to pay taxes because of our laws.

Why do the one percent want a tax break? Because they pay over 40% of all collected income taxes. think of that: one percent of our country are supporting nearly half of those social goodies, our military, and all federal government spending outside of SS and Medicare.

Instead of insisting they pay more, wouldn't it make more sense to have the bottom 45% pay something into federal income tax?

dear, the one percent and the poor Only pay the taxes they are legally obligated to pay; don't complain, be Patriotic.

Yes, they do, that was my point. It's also my point that the "wealthy" in this country currently pay much more than their fair share. They pay for all of us who don't pay anything at all.

Don't blame the poor, the one percent are lousy at tax avoidance.

The hell they are- we have basically a flat tax system, with ANOTHER cut for the rich coming.
By Ezra Klein September 19, 2012 Washington Post
At the heart of the debate over "the 47 percent" is an awful abuse of tax data.

This entire conversation is the result of a (largely successful) effort to redefine the debate over taxes from "how much in taxes do you pay" to "how much in federal income taxes do you pay?" This is good framing if you want to cut taxes on the rich. It's bad framing if you want to have even a basic understanding of who pays how much in taxes.

There's a reason some would prefer that more limited conversation. For most Americans, payroll and state and local taxes make up the majority of their tax bill. The federal income tax, by contrast, is our most progressive tax -- it's the tax we've designed to place the heaviest burden on the rich while bypassing the poor. And we've done that, again, because the working class is already paying a fairly high tax bill through payroll and state and local taxes.

But most people don't know very much about the tax code. And the federal income tax is still our most famous tax. So when they hear that half of Americans aren't paying federal income taxes, they're outraged -- even if they're among the folks who have a net negative tax burden! After all, they know they're paying taxes, and there's no reason for normal human beings to assume that the taxes getting taken out of their paycheck every week and some of the taxes they pay at the end of the year aren't classified as "federal income taxes."

Confining the discussion to the federal income tax plays another role, too: It makes the tax code look much more progressive than it actually is.

Take someone who makes $4 million dollars a year and someone who makes $40,000 a year. The person making $4 million dollars, assuming he's not doing some Romney-esque planning, is paying a 35 percent tax on most of that money. The person making $40,000 is probably paying no income tax at all. So that makes the system look really unfair to the rich guy.

That's the basic analysis of the 47 percent line. And it's a basic analysis that serves a purpose: It makes further tax cuts for the rich sound more reasonable.

But what if we did the same thing for the payroll tax? Remember, the payroll tax only applies to first $110,100 or so, our rich friends is only paying payroll taxes on 2.7 percent of his income. The guy making $40,000? He's paying payroll taxes on every dollar of his income. Now who's not getting a fair shake?

Which is why, if you want to understand who's paying what in taxes, you don't want to just look at federal income taxes, or federal payroll taxes, or state sales taxes -- you want to look at total taxes. And, luckily, the tax analysis group Citizens for Tax Justice keeps those numbers. 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:

Silly liberal and goofy of course the guy who makes $4 million a year may pay $1 million in taxes while the guy who makes $40,000 a year May pay a measly $3000. Why should one guy pay millions of dollars and another guy pay next to nothing. Should a rich guy have to pay a higher price for a car too.why do only the rich have to pay for government while everyone else gets a virtual free ride. America was not founded it to be a nation of leechers and takers.

Dear, don't blame the poor for being better at tax avoidance.

 

[Redfish]

hahahahahahaha how much tax do the poor pay into your new system?

They pay 17-18% now in all taxes- count fees and they're getting close to 20% if they're working. More than many rich, who average 28% and less than the upper middle class. Great job, GOP and dupes...

Socialism is FAIR, democratic capitalism, dupe. See Scandinavia, original, EU, OZ, NZ and the
US- tho ours is a feqqed up pander to the rich GOP mess. See sig.

so since when is 17% greater than 28%? I'm sorry, can you be a little more coherent and understand values? can you try again?

BTW, dining and toy purchases alone, the rich pay more in taxes.

so what; don't blame the poor for being better at tax avoidance, than the rich.

LOL, the tax code exempts the poor from paying taxes. they are not better at tax avoidance, what a dumb statement.

Dear, the poor and Mr. Trump pay the Taxes they are legally obligated to pay by law.

The poor are not complaining about taxes; is Mr. Trump not as good as the poor at avoiding taxes. Why does he need a tax break, if he is so good at avoiding taxes?

Trump pays what he is legally obligated to pay according to the tax code. Like everyone else his accountants and lawyers work to legally minimize his tax obligation.

I don't have any idea what point you are trying to make.

 

[Papageorgio]

Name the Democratic legislation that has raised the poor out of poverty.

What state are you in? In smart states, ACA, the only thing they've passed in 35 years. Reagan got his ridiculously low taxes on the richest and since then, pure obstruction. That's all your GOP masters care about DUHHH. And starting stupid wars and giant corrupt bubbles.

It hasn't raised the poor out of poverty. The Democrats have held either the House or the Senate in 60 of the last 84 years and the Presidency the majority of those years and have not developed one program to move the poor to the middle class, in fact under Obama, we have had more fall into a poor state and are relying on government subsidies than ever before.

The Dems need total control, filibuster proof, to do anything. The GOP has no clue about compromise for 30 years now. The "no-compromise, un-American TP GOP" (TIME). All they have for dupes is bs propaganda and hate- seems to be plenty for you...

The Great Society did a lot for a few years, and of course FDR and SS and UE have done wonders. Most elderly used to be poor, dupe.

And you have not showed me a bill that the Democrats introduced to help the poor out of poverty.

You have been had, silly dupe.

A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, helps the working poor out of poverty.

No, no it doesn't. That keeps up with inflation, no one gets out of poverty at $15 an hour. Also that isn't a federal bill that was introduced. Nice try, you got anything else?

 

[jc456]

it's called a with-holding tax to be accurate. So the guy making 40k pays into Federal Tax, SS, Medicare and state taxes, (if in a state that has state tax), along with insurance. And the only federal dollars in that, outside SS and Medicare, the 40k a year guy gets back after April 15th. All of it. So, the Tax Trump is working on is the Federal Tax, not SS, not Medicare yet, doesn't have anything to do with State nor insurance. So, how is it the 40K a year guy is affected more than the rich dude again?

All states have taxes- there you go again with income tax brainwashed obsession. These graphs includes refunds. Enjoy the state tax hikes that will immediately follow the Trump tax cuts and will KILL the nonrich AGAIN. Then MOST of the middle class will pay a higher % than the RICHEST. Great job!!

Tennessee, Florida, Texas and others do not have state taxes. sorry fella, you're coming up short.

from Wikipedia:

United States


"Payroll taxes were among the most regressive in 2010.
See also: Taxation in the United States and Federal Insurance Contributions Act tax
In the United States, payroll taxes are assessed by the federal government, some of the fifty states (Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming do not have state income tax; New Hampshire and Tennessee only tax income from interest and dividends)"

Gd I wish you fking libturds would learn about your own country.

So they don't have property tax, sales tax etc etc etc? DUHHHH. YOU ARE BRAINWASHED to only think of income tax, dupe.

no, those aren't in withholding taxes from an employer. That, stupid ass, was the discussion. So, now, can you get back on topic and answer my original question? cat got your fingers?

No, the discussion was about how much people pay in taxes. The rich, nowhere near enough, the nonrich and YOU, TOO MUCH. Thanks , lying GOP (only income taxes count! LOL) and silly dupes.

no here from your post. it seems your goal posts fell over.

hahahahahahaha how much tax do the poor pay into your new system?

They pay 17-18% now in all taxes- count fees and they're getting close to 20% if they're working. More than many rich, who average 28% and less than the upper middle class. Great job, GOP and dupes...

Socialism is FAIR, democratic capitalism, dupe. See Scandinavia, original, EU, OZ, NZ and the
US- tho ours is a feqqed up pander to the rich GOP mess. See sig.

so since when is 17% greater than 28%? I'm sorry, can you be a little more coherent and understand values? can you try again?

BTW, dining and toy purchases alone, the rich pay more in taxes.

so what; don't blame the poor for being better at tax avoidance, than the rich.

LOL, the tax code exempts the poor from paying taxes. they are not better at tax avoidance, what a dumb statement.

Exempts them from FED INCOME TAXES ONLY, dupe. There you go again. Look up brainwashed. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=7&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjbo4W8lsXTAhXh5oMKHfePBy8QFgg4MAY&url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/09/19/heres-why-the-47-percent-argument-is-an-abuse-of-tax-data/&usg=AFQjCNE_8LZl_VB-o4FAbNsJrxLxLCPy8g&sig2=S1pMazGUSOJIVx4ZUUlnYg
The one tax graph you really need to know




By Ezra Klein September 19, 2012

At the heart of the debate over "the 47 percent" is an awful abuse of tax data.

This entire conversation is the result of a (largely successful) effort to redefine the debate over taxes from "how much in taxes do you pay" to "how much in federal income taxes do you pay?" This is good framing if you want to cut taxes on the rich. It's bad framing if you want to have even a basic understanding of who pays how much in taxes.

There's a reason some would prefer that more limited conversation. For most Americans, payroll and state and local taxes make up the majority of their tax bill. The federal income tax, by contrast, is our most progressive tax -- it's the tax we've designed to place the heaviest burden on the rich while bypassing the poor. And we've done that, again, because the working class is already paying a fairly high tax bill through payroll and state and local taxes.

But most people don't know very much about the tax code. And the federal income tax is still our most famous tax. So when they hear that half of Americans aren't paying federal income taxes, they're outraged -- even if they're among the folks who have a net negative tax burden! After all, they know they're paying taxes, and there's no reason for normal human beings to assume that the taxes getting taken out of their paycheck every week and some of the taxes they pay at the end of the year aren't classified as "federal income taxes."

Confining the discussion to the federal income tax plays another role, too: It makes the tax code look much more progressive than it actually is.

Take someone who makes $4 million dollars a year and someone who makes $40,000 a year. The person making $4 million dollars, assuming he's not doing some Romney-esque planning, is paying a 35 percent tax on most of that money. The person making $40,000 is probably paying no income tax at all. So that makes the system look really unfair to the rich guy.

That's the basic analysis of the 47 percent line. And it's a basic analysis that serves a purpose: It makes further tax cuts for the rich sound more reasonable.

But what if we did the same thing for the payroll tax? Remember, the payroll tax only applies to first $110,100 or so, our rich friends is only paying payroll taxes on 2.7 percent of his income. The guy making $40,000? He's paying payroll taxes on every dollar of his income. Now who's not getting a fair shake?

Which is why, if you want to understand who's paying what in taxes, you don't want to just look at federal income taxes, or federal payroll taxes, or state sales taxes -- you want to look at total taxes. And, luckily, the tax analysis group Citizens for Tax Justice keeps those numbers. 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:

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*.


B) True

"But what if we did the same thing for the payroll tax? Remember, the payroll tax only applies to first $110,100 or so, our rich friends is only paying payroll taxes on 2.7 percent of his income. The guy making $40,000? He's paying payroll taxes on every dollar of his income. Now who's not getting a fair shake?"

Your fking quote bubba. Now pick up your goal posts and put em back in the ground. and answer my question.

So, how is it the 40K a year guy is affected more than the rich dude again?

 

[jc456]

Tennessee, Florida, Texas and others do not have state taxes. sorry fella, you're coming up short.

from Wikipedia:

United States


"Payroll taxes were among the most regressive in 2010.
See also: Taxation in the United States and Federal Insurance Contributions Act tax
In the United States, payroll taxes are assessed by the federal government, some of the fifty states (Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming do not have state income tax; New Hampshire and Tennessee only tax income from interest and dividends)"

Gd I wish you fking libturds would learn about your own country.

So they don't have property tax, sales tax etc etc etc? DUHHHH. YOU ARE BRAINWASHED to only think of income tax, dupe.

no, those aren't in withholding taxes from an employer. That, stupid ass, was the discussion. So, now, can you get back on topic and answer my original question? cat got your fingers?

No, the discussion was about how much people pay in taxes. The rich, nowhere near enough, the nonrich and YOU, TOO MUCH. Thanks , lying GOP (only income taxes count! LOL) and silly dupes.

View attachment 123638

That's income tax again, ferchrissake, the only progressive tax we have, and it appears the only tax Pub dupes can talk about...If you count all taxes, everyone with any income pays around the same %wise, and the richest keep all the new wealth, and the nonrich and the country go to hell...a flat tax is unfair to the nonrich.

well you won't answer the question I posed to you on withholding taxes.

So, how is it the 40K a year guy is affected more than the rich dude again?

so now move along.

 

[jc456]

Tennessee, Florida, Texas and others do not have state taxes. sorry fella, you're coming up short.

from Wikipedia:

United States


"Payroll taxes were among the most regressive in 2010.
See also: Taxation in the United States and Federal Insurance Contributions Act tax
In the United States, payroll taxes are assessed by the federal government, some of the fifty states (Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington, and Wyoming do not have state income tax; New Hampshire and Tennessee only tax income from interest and dividends)"

Gd I wish you fking libturds would learn about your own country.

So they don't have property tax, sales tax etc etc etc? DUHHHH. YOU ARE BRAINWASHED to only think of income tax, dupe.

no, those aren't in withholding taxes from an employer. That, stupid ass, was the discussion. So, now, can you get back on topic and answer my original question? cat got your fingers?

No, the discussion was about how much people pay in taxes. The rich, nowhere near enough, the nonrich and YOU, TOO MUCH. Thanks , lying GOP (only income taxes count! LOL) and silly dupes.

View attachment 123638

How much did Mr. Trump pay in personal income taxes?

Why is it the poor's fault, the one percent are lousy at tax avoidance, and want tax breaks?

I believe Trump paid 28%?

 

[jc456]

So they don't have property tax, sales tax etc etc etc? DUHHHH. YOU ARE BRAINWASHED to only think of income tax, dupe.

no, those aren't in withholding taxes from an employer. That, stupid ass, was the discussion. So, now, can you get back on topic and answer my original question? cat got your fingers?

No, the discussion was about how much people pay in taxes. The rich, nowhere near enough, the nonrich and YOU, TOO MUCH. Thanks , lying GOP (only income taxes count! LOL) and silly dupes.

View attachment 123638

How much did Mr. Trump pay in personal income taxes?

Why is it the poor's fault, the one percent are lousy at tax avoidance, and want tax breaks?

The 1% have nothing to do with what they are forced to pay in taxes. Like most people, I'm sure they do what they can to pay the least, but you have to obey the law.

Just like the bottom 45% of our country that pay no income taxes at all. It's not being slick, clever, or creative, they just don't have to pay taxes because of our laws.

Why do the one percent want a tax break? Because they pay over 40% of all collected income taxes. think of that: one percent of our country are supporting nearly half of those social goodies, our military, and all federal government spending outside of SS and Medicare.

Instead of insisting they pay more, wouldn't it make more sense to have the bottom 45% pay something into federal income tax?

or work for a fking dollar. how's about that? who ever wrote that the poor shouldn't work to get their welfare check? they want their check, go to the city hall and sign up for projects in the city and must report to work daily or lose money.

I don't make a buck sitting doing nothing.

 

[jc456]

no, those aren't in withholding taxes from an employer. That, stupid ass, was the discussion. So, now, can you get back on topic and answer my original question? cat got your fingers?

No, the discussion was about how much people pay in taxes. The rich, nowhere near enough, the nonrich and YOU, TOO MUCH. Thanks , lying GOP (only income taxes count! LOL) and silly dupes.

View attachment 123638

How much did Mr. Trump pay in personal income taxes?

Why is it the poor's fault, the one percent are lousy at tax avoidance, and want tax breaks?

The 1% have nothing to do with what they are forced to pay in taxes. Like most people, I'm sure they do what they can to pay the least, but you have to obey the law.

Just like the bottom 45% of our country that pay no income taxes at all. It's not being slick, clever, or creative, they just don't have to pay taxes because of our laws.

Why do the one percent want a tax break? Because they pay over 40% of all collected income taxes. think of that: one percent of our country are supporting nearly half of those social goodies, our military, and all federal government spending outside of SS and Medicare.

Instead of insisting they pay more, wouldn't it make more sense to have the bottom 45% pay something into federal income tax?

dear, the one percent and the poor Only pay the taxes they are legally obligated to pay; don't complain, be Patriotic.

so playing ring around the rosie, what tax exactly do the poor pay outside sales tax?

BTW, the poor don't get a tax break, cause they don't pay federal taxes. it is quite simple if someone like you actually had a brain.

 

[jc456]

The 1% have nothing to do with what they are forced to pay in taxes. Like most people, I'm sure they do what they can to pay the least, but you have to obey the law.

Just like the bottom 45% of our country that pay no income taxes at all. It's not being slick, clever, or creative, they just don't have to pay taxes because of our laws.

Why do the one percent want a tax break? Because they pay over 40% of all collected income taxes. think of that: one percent of our country are supporting nearly half of those social goodies, our military, and all federal government spending outside of SS and Medicare.

Instead of insisting they pay more, wouldn't it make more sense to have the bottom 45% pay something into federal income tax?

dear, the one percent and the poor Only pay the taxes they are legally obligated to pay; don't complain, be Patriotic.

Yes, they do, that was my point. It's also my point that the "wealthy" in this country currently pay much more than their fair share. They pay for all of us who don't pay anything at all.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwihu-uNlsbTAhXLOSYKHZZQA1oQFgg2MAU&url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/09/19/heres-why-the-47-percent-argument-is-an-abuse-of-tax-data/&usg=AFQjCNE_8LZl_VB-o4FAbNsJrxLxLCPy8g&sig2=xYPpaEMcNvg2lSJR0GnSkw

By Ezra Klein September 19, 2012
At the heart of the debate over "the 47 percent" is an awful abuse of tax data.

This entire conversation is the result of a (largely successful) effort to redefine the debate over taxes from "how much in taxes do you pay" to "how much in federal income taxes do you pay?" This is good framing if you want to cut taxes on the rich. It's bad framing if you want to have even a basic understanding of who pays how much in taxes.

There's a reason some would prefer that more limited conversation. For most Americans, payroll and state and local taxes make up the majority of their tax bill. The federal income tax, by contrast, is our most progressive tax -- it's the tax we've designed to place the heaviest burden on the rich while bypassing the poor. And we've done that, again, because the working class is already paying a fairly high tax bill through payroll and state and local taxes.

But most people don't know very much about the tax code. And the federal income tax is still our most famous tax. So when they hear that half of Americans aren't paying federal income taxes, they're outraged -- even if they're among the folks who have a net negative tax burden! After all, they know they're paying taxes, and there's no reason for normal human beings to assume that the taxes getting taken out of their paycheck every week and some of the taxes they pay at the end of the year aren't classified as "federal income taxes."

Confining the discussion to the federal income tax plays another role, too: It makes the tax code look much more progressive than it actually is.

Take someone who makes $4 million dollars a year and someone who makes $40,000 a year. The person making $4 million dollars, assuming he's not doing some Romney-esque planning, is paying a 35 percent tax on most of that money. The person making $40,000 is probably paying no income tax at all. So that makes the system look really unfair to the rich guy.

That's the basic analysis of the 47 percent line. And it's a basic analysis that serves a purpose: It makes further tax cuts for the rich sound more reasonable.

But what if we did the same thing for the payroll tax? Remember, the payroll tax only applies to first $110,100 or so, our rich friends is only paying payroll taxes on 2.7 percent of his income. The guy making $40,000? He's paying payroll taxes on every dollar of his income. Now who's not getting a fair shake?

Which is why, if you want to understand who's paying what in taxes, you don't want to just look at federal income taxes, or federal payroll taxes, or state sales taxes -- you want to look at total taxes. And, luckily, the tax analysis group Citizens for Tax Justice keeps those numbers. 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:

Right, keep posting your crap about total tax bill to avoid talking about federal income tax.

Social Security deductions do not fund our military. Medicare does not fund welfare, food stamps or education. Sales taxes do not make the payroll of federal employees. Only federal income tax does that.

And not much else, as the rich are making out like bandits, and about to get ANOTHER big tax cut from Trump. Your tax graph is basically a flat tax already. A disgrace.

so you're still confused I see. you should take a tax class.

 

[jc456]

How much did Mr. Trump pay in personal income taxes?

Why is it the poor's fault, the one percent are lousy at tax avoidance, and want tax breaks?

The 1% have nothing to do with what they are forced to pay in taxes. Like most people, I'm sure they do what they can to pay the least, but you have to obey the law.

Just like the bottom 45% of our country that pay no income taxes at all. It's not being slick, clever, or creative, they just don't have to pay taxes because of our laws.

Why do the one percent want a tax break? Because they pay over 40% of all collected income taxes. think of that: one percent of our country are supporting nearly half of those social goodies, our military, and all federal government spending outside of SS and Medicare.

Instead of insisting they pay more, wouldn't it make more sense to have the bottom 45% pay something into federal income tax?

dear, the one percent and the poor Only pay the taxes they are legally obligated to pay; don't complain, be Patriotic.

Yes, they do, that was my point. It's also my point that the "wealthy" in this country currently pay much more than their fair share. They pay for all of us who don't pay anything at all.

Don't blame the poor, the one percent are lousy at tax avoidance.

The hell they are- we have basically a flat tax system, with ANOTHER cut for the rich coming.
By Ezra Klein September 19, 2012 Washington Post
At the heart of the debate over "the 47 percent" is an awful abuse of tax data.

This entire conversation is the result of a (largely successful) effort to redefine the debate over taxes from "how much in taxes do you pay" to "how much in federal income taxes do you pay?" This is good framing if you want to cut taxes on the rich. It's bad framing if you want to have even a basic understanding of who pays how much in taxes.

There's a reason some would prefer that more limited conversation. For most Americans, payroll and state and local taxes make up the majority of their tax bill. The federal income tax, by contrast, is our most progressive tax -- it's the tax we've designed to place the heaviest burden on the rich while bypassing the poor. And we've done that, again, because the working class is already paying a fairly high tax bill through payroll and state and local taxes.

But most people don't know very much about the tax code. And the federal income tax is still our most famous tax. So when they hear that half of Americans aren't paying federal income taxes, they're outraged -- even if they're among the folks who have a net negative tax burden! After all, they know they're paying taxes, and there's no reason for normal human beings to assume that the taxes getting taken out of their paycheck every week and some of the taxes they pay at the end of the year aren't classified as "federal income taxes."

Confining the discussion to the federal income tax plays another role, too: It makes the tax code look much more progressive than it actually is.

Take someone who makes $4 million dollars a year and someone who makes $40,000 a year. The person making $4 million dollars, assuming he's not doing some Romney-esque planning, is paying a 35 percent tax on most of that money. The person making $40,000 is probably paying no income tax at all. So that makes the system look really unfair to the rich guy.

That's the basic analysis of the 47 percent line. And it's a basic analysis that serves a purpose: It makes further tax cuts for the rich sound more reasonable.

But what if we did the same thing for the payroll tax? Remember, the payroll tax only applies to first $110,100 or so, our rich friends is only paying payroll taxes on 2.7 percent of his income. The guy making $40,000? He's paying payroll taxes on every dollar of his income. Now who's not getting a fair shake?

Which is why, if you want to understand who's paying what in taxes, you don't want to just look at federal income taxes, or federal payroll taxes, or state sales taxes -- you want to look at total taxes. And, luckily, the tax analysis group Citizens for Tax Justice keeps those numbers. 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:

so you double down on the withholding tax squat juice again. And again, the 40K person gets all of his/her federal tax dollars back at tax time. ooops

 

[jc456]

The 1% have nothing to do with what they are forced to pay in taxes. Like most people, I'm sure they do what they can to pay the least, but you have to obey the law.

Just like the bottom 45% of our country that pay no income taxes at all. It's not being slick, clever, or creative, they just don't have to pay taxes because of our laws.

Why do the one percent want a tax break? Because they pay over 40% of all collected income taxes. think of that: one percent of our country are supporting nearly half of those social goodies, our military, and all federal government spending outside of SS and Medicare.

Instead of insisting they pay more, wouldn't it make more sense to have the bottom 45% pay something into federal income tax?

dear, the one percent and the poor Only pay the taxes they are legally obligated to pay; don't complain, be Patriotic.

Yes, they do, that was my point. It's also my point that the "wealthy" in this country currently pay much more than their fair share. They pay for all of us who don't pay anything at all.

Don't blame the poor, the one percent are lousy at tax avoidance.

The hell they are- we have basically a flat tax system, with ANOTHER cut for the rich coming.
By Ezra Klein September 19, 2012 Washington Post
At the heart of the debate over "the 47 percent" is an awful abuse of tax data.

This entire conversation is the result of a (largely successful) effort to redefine the debate over taxes from "how much in taxes do you pay" to "how much in federal income taxes do you pay?" This is good framing if you want to cut taxes on the rich. It's bad framing if you want to have even a basic understanding of who pays how much in taxes.

There's a reason some would prefer that more limited conversation. For most Americans, payroll and state and local taxes make up the majority of their tax bill. The federal income tax, by contrast, is our most progressive tax -- it's the tax we've designed to place the heaviest burden on the rich while bypassing the poor. And we've done that, again, because the working class is already paying a fairly high tax bill through payroll and state and local taxes.

But most people don't know very much about the tax code. And the federal income tax is still our most famous tax. So when they hear that half of Americans aren't paying federal income taxes, they're outraged -- even if they're among the folks who have a net negative tax burden! After all, they know they're paying taxes, and there's no reason for normal human beings to assume that the taxes getting taken out of their paycheck every week and some of the taxes they pay at the end of the year aren't classified as "federal income taxes."

Confining the discussion to the federal income tax plays another role, too: It makes the tax code look much more progressive than it actually is.

Take someone who makes $4 million dollars a year and someone who makes $40,000 a year. The person making $4 million dollars, assuming he's not doing some Romney-esque planning, is paying a 35 percent tax on most of that money. The person making $40,000 is probably paying no income tax at all. So that makes the system look really unfair to the rich guy.

That's the basic analysis of the 47 percent line. And it's a basic analysis that serves a purpose: It makes further tax cuts for the rich sound more reasonable.

But what if we did the same thing for the payroll tax? Remember, the payroll tax only applies to first $110,100 or so, our rich friends is only paying payroll taxes on 2.7 percent of his income. The guy making $40,000? He's paying payroll taxes on every dollar of his income. Now who's not getting a fair shake?

Which is why, if you want to understand who's paying what in taxes, you don't want to just look at federal income taxes, or federal payroll taxes, or state sales taxes -- you want to look at total taxes. And, luckily, the tax analysis group Citizens for Tax Justice keeps those numbers. 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:

Why do one percenters, need a tax break?

who said they asked for one?

 

[jc456]

dear, the one percent and the poor Only pay the taxes they are legally obligated to pay; don't complain, be Patriotic.

Yes, they do, that was my point. It's also my point that the "wealthy" in this country currently pay much more than their fair share. They pay for all of us who don't pay anything at all.

Don't blame the poor, the one percent are lousy at tax avoidance.

The hell they are- we have basically a flat tax system, with ANOTHER cut for the rich coming.
By Ezra Klein September 19, 2012 Washington Post
At the heart of the debate over "the 47 percent" is an awful abuse of tax data.

This entire conversation is the result of a (largely successful) effort to redefine the debate over taxes from "how much in taxes do you pay" to "how much in federal income taxes do you pay?" This is good framing if you want to cut taxes on the rich. It's bad framing if you want to have even a basic understanding of who pays how much in taxes.

There's a reason some would prefer that more limited conversation. For most Americans, payroll and state and local taxes make up the majority of their tax bill. The federal income tax, by contrast, is our most progressive tax -- it's the tax we've designed to place the heaviest burden on the rich while bypassing the poor. And we've done that, again, because the working class is already paying a fairly high tax bill through payroll and state and local taxes.

But most people don't know very much about the tax code. And the federal income tax is still our most famous tax. So when they hear that half of Americans aren't paying federal income taxes, they're outraged -- even if they're among the folks who have a net negative tax burden! After all, they know they're paying taxes, and there's no reason for normal human beings to assume that the taxes getting taken out of their paycheck every week and some of the taxes they pay at the end of the year aren't classified as "federal income taxes."

Confining the discussion to the federal income tax plays another role, too: It makes the tax code look much more progressive than it actually is.

Take someone who makes $4 million dollars a year and someone who makes $40,000 a year. The person making $4 million dollars, assuming he's not doing some Romney-esque planning, is paying a 35 percent tax on most of that money. The person making $40,000 is probably paying no income tax at all. So that makes the system look really unfair to the rich guy.

That's the basic analysis of the 47 percent line. And it's a basic analysis that serves a purpose: It makes further tax cuts for the rich sound more reasonable.

But what if we did the same thing for the payroll tax? Remember, the payroll tax only applies to first $110,100 or so, our rich friends is only paying payroll taxes on 2.7 percent of his income. The guy making $40,000? He's paying payroll taxes on every dollar of his income. Now who's not getting a fair shake?

Which is why, if you want to understand who's paying what in taxes, you don't want to just look at federal income taxes, or federal payroll taxes, or state sales taxes -- you want to look at total taxes. And, luckily, the tax analysis group Citizens for Tax Justice keeps those numbers. 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:

Why do one percenters, need a tax break?

They need a big tax hike, like Dems want to do.

for the purpose of what?

 

[jc456]

Name the Democratic legislation that has raised the poor out of poverty.

What state are you in? In smart states, ACA, the only thing they've passed in 35 years. Reagan got his ridiculously low taxes on the richest and since then, pure obstruction. That's all your GOP masters care about DUHHH. And starting stupid wars and giant corrupt bubbles.

It hasn't raised the poor out of poverty. The Democrats have held either the House or the Senate in 60 of the last 84 years and the Presidency the majority of those years and have not developed one program to move the poor to the middle class, in fact under Obama, we have had more fall into a poor state and are relying on government subsidies than ever before.

The Dems need total control, filibuster proof, to do anything. The GOP has no clue about compromise for 30 years now. The "no-compromise, un-American TP GOP" (TIME). All they have for dupes is bs propaganda and hate- seems to be plenty for you...

The Great Society did a lot for a few years, and of course FDR and SS and UE have done wonders. Most elderly used to be poor, dupe.

And you have not showed me a bill that the Democrats introduced to help the poor out of poverty.

You have been had, silly dupe.

A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, helps the working poor out of poverty.

hly fk......

 

[jc456]

dear, the one percent and the poor Only pay the taxes they are legally obligated to pay; don't complain, be Patriotic.

Yes, they do, that was my point. It's also my point that the "wealthy" in this country currently pay much more than their fair share. They pay for all of us who don't pay anything at all.

Don't blame the poor, the one percent are lousy at tax avoidance.

The hell they are- we have basically a flat tax system, with ANOTHER cut for the rich coming.
By Ezra Klein September 19, 2012 Washington Post
At the heart of the debate over "the 47 percent" is an awful abuse of tax data.

This entire conversation is the result of a (largely successful) effort to redefine the debate over taxes from "how much in taxes do you pay" to "how much in federal income taxes do you pay?" This is good framing if you want to cut taxes on the rich. It's bad framing if you want to have even a basic understanding of who pays how much in taxes.

There's a reason some would prefer that more limited conversation. For most Americans, payroll and state and local taxes make up the majority of their tax bill. The federal income tax, by contrast, is our most progressive tax -- it's the tax we've designed to place the heaviest burden on the rich while bypassing the poor. And we've done that, again, because the working class is already paying a fairly high tax bill through payroll and state and local taxes.

But most people don't know very much about the tax code. And the federal income tax is still our most famous tax. So when they hear that half of Americans aren't paying federal income taxes, they're outraged -- even if they're among the folks who have a net negative tax burden! After all, they know they're paying taxes, and there's no reason for normal human beings to assume that the taxes getting taken out of their paycheck every week and some of the taxes they pay at the end of the year aren't classified as "federal income taxes."

Confining the discussion to the federal income tax plays another role, too: It makes the tax code look much more progressive than it actually is.

Take someone who makes $4 million dollars a year and someone who makes $40,000 a year. The person making $4 million dollars, assuming he's not doing some Romney-esque planning, is paying a 35 percent tax on most of that money. The person making $40,000 is probably paying no income tax at all. So that makes the system look really unfair to the rich guy.

That's the basic analysis of the 47 percent line. And it's a basic analysis that serves a purpose: It makes further tax cuts for the rich sound more reasonable.

But what if we did the same thing for the payroll tax? Remember, the payroll tax only applies to first $110,100 or so, our rich friends is only paying payroll taxes on 2.7 percent of his income. The guy making $40,000? He's paying payroll taxes on every dollar of his income. Now who's not getting a fair shake?

Which is why, if you want to understand who's paying what in taxes, you don't want to just look at federal income taxes, or federal payroll taxes, or state sales taxes -- you want to look at total taxes. And, luckily, the tax analysis group Citizens for Tax Justice keeps those numbers. 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:

Silly liberal and goofy of course the guy who makes $4 million a year may pay $1 million in taxes while the guy who makes $40,000 a year May pay a measly $3000. Why should one guy pay millions of dollars and another guy pay next to nothing. Should a rich guy have to pay a higher price for a car too.why do only the rich have to pay for government while everyone else gets a virtual free ride. America was not founded it to be a nation of leechers and takers.

Dear, don't blame the poor for being better at tax avoidance.

well we can take their money away and they can keep their avoidance.

 

[Markle]

A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, helps the working poor out of poverty.

Not at all.

The minimum wage is a trigger in many contracts. Doubling the minimum wage would necessarily double the wage of someone already earning $15.00 per hour to $30.00.

The end result will be that the nine of the ten order takers at the fast food restaurant will be replaced by one technician earning $40.00 per hour to maintain the ten kiosks which now eliminate nine jobs and they would still have two janitors earning the minimum wage of $15.00

The end result, the two janitors are still living in poverty, there are simply fewer jobs available to young people getting their first jobs and gaining valuable work experience.

That's okay, we're heading in that direction today so might as well get them out of work early!

 

[danielpalos]

They pay 17-18% now in all taxes- count fees and they're getting close to 20% if they're working. More than many rich, who average 28% and less than the upper middle class. Great job, GOP and dupes...

Socialism is FAIR, democratic capitalism, dupe. See Scandinavia, original, EU, OZ, NZ and the
US- tho ours is a feqqed up pander to the rich GOP mess. See sig.

so since when is 17% greater than 28%? I'm sorry, can you be a little more coherent and understand values? can you try again?

BTW, dining and toy purchases alone, the rich pay more in taxes.

so what; don't blame the poor for being better at tax avoidance, than the rich.

LOL, the tax code exempts the poor from paying taxes. they are not better at tax avoidance, what a dumb statement.

Dear, the poor and Mr. Trump pay the Taxes they are legally obligated to pay by law.

The poor are not complaining about taxes; is Mr. Trump not as good as the poor at avoiding taxes. Why does he need a tax break, if he is so good at avoiding taxes?

Trump pays what he is legally obligated to pay according to the tax code. Like everyone else his accountants and lawyers work to legally minimize his tax obligation.

I don't have any idea what point you are trying to make.

Why does a one percenter, need a tax break?

Is our debt not large enough.

 

[danielpalos]

What state are you in? In smart states, ACA, the only thing they've passed in 35 years. Reagan got his ridiculously low taxes on the richest and since then, pure obstruction. That's all your GOP masters care about DUHHH. And starting stupid wars and giant corrupt bubbles.

It hasn't raised the poor out of poverty. The Democrats have held either the House or the Senate in 60 of the last 84 years and the Presidency the majority of those years and have not developed one program to move the poor to the middle class, in fact under Obama, we have had more fall into a poor state and are relying on government subsidies than ever before.

The Dems need total control, filibuster proof, to do anything. The GOP has no clue about compromise for 30 years now. The "no-compromise, un-American TP GOP" (TIME). All they have for dupes is bs propaganda and hate- seems to be plenty for you...

The Great Society did a lot for a few years, and of course FDR and SS and UE have done wonders. Most elderly used to be poor, dupe.

And you have not showed me a bill that the Democrats introduced to help the poor out of poverty.

You have been had, silly dupe.

A fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, helps the working poor out of poverty.

No, no it doesn't. That keeps up with inflation, no one gets out of poverty at $15 an hour. Also that isn't a federal bill that was introduced. Nice try, you got anything else?

dear, it is about privatizing costs, not socializing costs. a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage, helps do that.

 

[danielpalos]

So they don't have property tax, sales tax etc etc etc? DUHHHH. YOU ARE BRAINWASHED to only think of income tax, dupe.

no, those aren't in withholding taxes from an employer. That, stupid ass, was the discussion. So, now, can you get back on topic and answer my original question? cat got your fingers?

No, the discussion was about how much people pay in taxes. The rich, nowhere near enough, the nonrich and YOU, TOO MUCH. Thanks , lying GOP (only income taxes count! LOL) and silly dupes.

View attachment 123638

How much did Mr. Trump pay in personal income taxes?

Why is it the poor's fault, the one percent are lousy at tax avoidance, and want tax breaks?

I believe Trump paid 28%?

Why is it the poor's fault, the one percent are lousy at tax avoidance, and want tax breaks?

 

[danielpalos]

No, the discussion was about how much people pay in taxes. The rich, nowhere near enough, the nonrich and YOU, TOO MUCH. Thanks , lying GOP (only income taxes count! LOL) and silly dupes.

View attachment 123638

How much did Mr. Trump pay in personal income taxes?

Why is it the poor's fault, the one percent are lousy at tax avoidance, and want tax breaks?

The 1% have nothing to do with what they are forced to pay in taxes. Like most people, I'm sure they do what they can to pay the least, but you have to obey the law.

Just like the bottom 45% of our country that pay no income taxes at all. It's not being slick, clever, or creative, they just don't have to pay taxes because of our laws.

Why do the one percent want a tax break? Because they pay over 40% of all collected income taxes. think of that: one percent of our country are supporting nearly half of those social goodies, our military, and all federal government spending outside of SS and Medicare.

Instead of insisting they pay more, wouldn't it make more sense to have the bottom 45% pay something into federal income tax?

dear, the one percent and the poor Only pay the taxes they are legally obligated to pay; don't complain, be Patriotic.

so playing ring around the rosie, what tax exactly do the poor pay outside sales tax?

BTW, the poor don't get a tax break, cause they don't pay federal taxes. it is quite simple if someone like you actually had a brain.

Why is it the poor's fault, the one percent are lousy at tax avoidance, and want tax breaks?

 

[danielpalos]

dear, the one percent and the poor Only pay the taxes they are legally obligated to pay; don't complain, be Patriotic.

Yes, they do, that was my point. It's also my point that the "wealthy" in this country currently pay much more than their fair share. They pay for all of us who don't pay anything at all.

Don't blame the poor, the one percent are lousy at tax avoidance.

The hell they are- we have basically a flat tax system, with ANOTHER cut for the rich coming.
By Ezra Klein September 19, 2012 Washington Post
At the heart of the debate over "the 47 percent" is an awful abuse of tax data.

This entire conversation is the result of a (largely successful) effort to redefine the debate over taxes from "how much in taxes do you pay" to "how much in federal income taxes do you pay?" This is good framing if you want to cut taxes on the rich. It's bad framing if you want to have even a basic understanding of who pays how much in taxes.

There's a reason some would prefer that more limited conversation. For most Americans, payroll and state and local taxes make up the majority of their tax bill. The federal income tax, by contrast, is our most progressive tax -- it's the tax we've designed to place the heaviest burden on the rich while bypassing the poor. And we've done that, again, because the working class is already paying a fairly high tax bill through payroll and state and local taxes.

But most people don't know very much about the tax code. And the federal income tax is still our most famous tax. So when they hear that half of Americans aren't paying federal income taxes, they're outraged -- even if they're among the folks who have a net negative tax burden! After all, they know they're paying taxes, and there's no reason for normal human beings to assume that the taxes getting taken out of their paycheck every week and some of the taxes they pay at the end of the year aren't classified as "federal income taxes."

Confining the discussion to the federal income tax plays another role, too: It makes the tax code look much more progressive than it actually is.

Take someone who makes $4 million dollars a year and someone who makes $40,000 a year. The person making $4 million dollars, assuming he's not doing some Romney-esque planning, is paying a 35 percent tax on most of that money. The person making $40,000 is probably paying no income tax at all. So that makes the system look really unfair to the rich guy.

That's the basic analysis of the 47 percent line. And it's a basic analysis that serves a purpose: It makes further tax cuts for the rich sound more reasonable.

But what if we did the same thing for the payroll tax? Remember, the payroll tax only applies to first $110,100 or so, our rich friends is only paying payroll taxes on 2.7 percent of his income. The guy making $40,000? He's paying payroll taxes on every dollar of his income. Now who's not getting a fair shake?

Which is why, if you want to understand who's paying what in taxes, you don't want to just look at federal income taxes, or federal payroll taxes, or state sales taxes -- you want to look at total taxes. And, luckily, the tax analysis group Citizens for Tax Justice keeps those numbers. 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:

Why do one percenters, need a tax break?

who said they asked for one?

why should i take you seriously about politics?