Taxes. Who Pays, How Much, How Much is Enough?

Warfish · 11-28-2007, 12:10 PM

A few stats I heard this morning on the radio, I'll leave the source unmentioned, as it's more fun that way......

[QUOTE]The Top 1% (Income Earners) of Taxpayers pays 37% of All Payroll Taxes.

The Top 10% of Taxpayers pays 62% of Taxes.

The Bottom 50% of Taxpayers pays 3% of Taxes.[/QUOTE]

So the question is this: How much should the Top 1% on Income Earners contribute, as a percentage of total, to total Taxes in your ideal world?

And how much, in that same ideal world, should the Bottom 50% contribute, as a percentage of the whole?

Winstonbiggs · 11-28-2007, 12:22 PM

Based on those stats the top payers are paying less as a percentage than the percentage of wealth they have.

Oakliusmaximus · 11-28-2007, 01:42 PM

Warfish - Great topic. I’ve been reading quite a bit about this recently. Personally, I have a problem with 50% of the population voting on issues that will hardly or not at all affect them but will negatively affect the other half of the population. What do they care if the government is massively over spending? There is no incentive for these people to keep politicians in line and every incentive for politicians to increase handouts.

Here’s a good article by Walter Williams-
[URL="http://www.townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2007/11/14/congressional_and_leftist_lies"]http://www.townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2007/11/14/congressional_and_leftist_lies[/URL]
[QUOTE]The fact that there are so many American earners who have little or no financial stake in our country poses a serious political problem. The Tax Foundation estimates that 41 percent of whites, 56 percent of blacks, 59 percent of American Indian and Aleut Eskimo and 40 percent Asian and Pacific Islanders had no 2004 federal income tax liability. The study concluded, "When all of the dependents of these income-producing households are counted, there are roughly 122 million Americans -- 44 percent of the U.S. population -- who are outside of the federal income tax system." These people represent a natural constituency for big-spending politicians. In other words, if you have little or no financial stake in America, what do you care about the cost of massive federal spending programs?

Similarly, what do you care about tax cuts if you're paying little or no taxes? In fact, you might be openly hostile toward tax cuts out of fear that they might lead to reductions in handout programs from which you benefit. Survey polls have confirmed this. According to The Harris Poll taken in June 2003, 51 percent of Democrats thought the tax cuts enacted by Congress were a bad thing while 16 percent of Republicans thought so. Among Democrats, 67 percent thought the tax cuts were unfair while 32 percent of Republicans thought so. When asked whether the $350 billion tax cut package will help your family finances, 59 percent of those surveyed said no and 35 percent said yes.

Whether you're for or against President Bush matters little, but what do you think of politicians and their media dupes winning you over with lies about the rich not paying their fair share? And, by the way, $145,000 or even $345,000 a year hardly qualifies one as rich. It's not even yacht money.
[/QUOTE]

jets5ever · 11-28-2007, 01:44 PM

[QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;2233685]Based on those stats the top payers are paying less as a percentage than the percentage of wealth they have.[/QUOTE]

Right, but we tax income, not wealth.

bitonti · 11-28-2007, 01:48 PM

the problem in this country isn't the tax system it's the out of control spending.

if we spend like we have spent in the last 8 years the tax rates lose meaning.

Warfish · 11-28-2007, 01:49 PM

[QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;2233685]Based on those stats the top payers are paying less as a percentage than the percentage of wealth they have.[/QUOTE]

Ok. But that doesn't answer the question, it just shows that we tax Income, not overall asset wealth (as George pointed out above).

In terms of Income Percentiles, how much of the total Income Tax Burden should the top 1% of earners carry? The top 10% carry? The Bottom 50% carry? As you see it in your perfect tax world.

parafly · 11-28-2007, 01:52 PM

In an ideal world, the Fair Tax would work nicely.

[URL="http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer"]http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer[/URL]

PlumberKhan · 11-28-2007, 02:16 PM

[QUOTE=Oakliusmaximus;2233896]Personally, I have a problem with 50% of the population voting on issues that will hardly or not at all affect them but will negatively affect the other half of the population. [/QUOTE]

WTF?

And I'm sure the OTHER 50% of the population has a problem with the other side also.

You know what they say.....Mo' Money, Mo' Problems. Deal with it.

That is, after all, why that famous thingamajiggy says "...and to the Republic(not democracy) for which it stands..."

Sourceworx · 11-28-2007, 02:22 PM

I think the Fair Tax is a great idea, but the Government will never go for it.

If we're going to keep a federal income tax system, I always thought the Flat Tax is the only truly fair system.

Buster · 11-28-2007, 02:26 PM

[QUOTE=sourceworx;2233982]I think the Fair Tax is a great idea, but the Government will never go for it.

If we're going to keep a federal income tax system, I always thought the Flat Tax is the only truly fair system.[/QUOTE]

Wouldn't the "fair tax" eliminate the mortgage deduction?

JetsCrazey · 11-28-2007, 02:34 PM

"The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax" -Albert Einstein

Your taxes go towards fighting wars and paying interest to banks. They also go towards entitlement payments because the government can't manage an equitable financial system because such a system would involve ending favoritism in government. If we had a just financial system, entitlements wouldn't be necessary.

The best tax is a flat tax...real flat like zero. Taxation = inefficient market distortion. There is no justificiation for the government taking the fruits of your labor. That is known as socialism, and it is the antithesis of freedom. Maybe someday the people in this country will stop watching the corporate-owned media and read some real political theory.

Buster · 11-28-2007, 02:40 PM

[QUOTE=JetsCrazey;2234003]"The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax" -Albert Einstein

Your taxes go towards fighting wars and paying interest to banks. They also go towards entitlement payments because the government can't manage an equitable financial system because such a system would involve ending favoritism in government. If we had a just financial system, entitlements wouldn't be necessary.

The best tax is a flat tax...real flat like zero. Taxation = inefficient market distortion. There is no justificiation for the government taking the fruits of your labor. That is known as socialism, and it is the antithesis of freedom.[/QUOTE]

So building roads, schools, water treatment plants, paying for police and firemen etc are unjustified?

Sourceworx · 11-28-2007, 02:42 PM

[QUOTE=JetsCrazey;2234003]"The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax" -Albert Einstein

Your taxes go towards fighting wars and paying interest to banks. They also go towards entitlement payments because the government can't manage an equitable financial system because such a system would involve ending favoritism in government. If we had a just financial system, entitlements wouldn't be necessary.

The best tax is a flat tax...real flat like zero. Taxation = inefficient market distortion. There is no justificiation for the government taking the fruits of your labor. That is known as socialism, and it is the antithesis of freedom. Maybe someday the people in this country will stop watching the corporate-owned media and read some real political theory.[/QUOTE]

All very true. If the government were to institute a truly fair system they'd simply have a federal sales tax and eliminate income taxes altogether.

But unfortunately there's the way it ought to be, and there's the way it is. :(

Big L · 11-28-2007, 02:44 PM

[QUOTE=JetsCrazey;2234003]The best tax is a flat tax...real flat like zero. Taxation = inefficient market distortion. [B]There is no justificiation for the government taking the fruits of your labor.[/B] That is known as socialism, and it is the antithesis of freedom. Maybe someday the people in this country will stop watching the corporate-owned media and read some real political theory.[/QUOTE]

I'm not defending the gov, they're all a bunch of scvmbags, but one justification is your taxes pay for services you use every day, such as roads and brigdes, and to those of us who live in urban environments, water and sewage.

Big Blocker · 11-28-2007, 02:47 PM

[QUOTE=JetsCrazey;2234003]"The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax" -Albert Einstein

Your taxes go towards fighting wars and paying interest to banks. They also go towards entitlement payments because the government can't manage an equitable financial system because such a system would involve ending favoritism in government. If we had a just financial system, entitlements wouldn't be necessary.

The best tax is a flat tax...real flat like zero. Taxation = inefficient market distortion. There is no justificiation for the government taking the fruits of your labor. That is known as socialism, and it is the antithesis of freedom. Maybe someday the people in this country will stop watching the corporate-owned media and read some real political theory.[/QUOTE]

The so called fruits of your own labor have no value whatsoever outside of society. Taxes are the cost you pay to keep society going. Not to mention to protect you, your wealth and your sorry ass from those who otherwise would take it.

Rights to property mean nothing without the law.

Boy, people can really be dumb.

Sourceworx · 11-28-2007, 02:47 PM

[QUOTE=Buster;2234014]So building roads, schools, water treatment plants, paying for police and firemen etc are unjustified?[/QUOTE]

No they aren't. But by having a mandatory tax on our income, we really aren't free. If the government had a federal sales tax they'd be able to raise enough money all the municipalities we need. The system would be truly fair. The more you spend, the more taxes you pay.

The challenge is what items get taxed? Do you tax food, medication or other basic necessities?

Big Blocker · 11-28-2007, 02:50 PM

[QUOTE=sourceworx;2234035]No they aren't. But by having a mandatory tax on our income, we really aren't free. If the government had a federal sales tax they'd be able to raise enough money all the municipalities we need. The system would be truly fair. The more you spend, the more taxes you pay.

The challenge is what items get taxed? Do you tax food, medication or other basic necessities?[/QUOTE]

I don't see the problem with taxing income. First of all it's not as if you would make any money at all in the first place were there not a society to make it in. There is no income to make outside of that society.

THen it should also be obvious that the people who are most benefitting from society have the greater stake in it's existence, even if they do not directly draw on the government for largesse.

Buster · 11-28-2007, 02:52 PM

[QUOTE=sourceworx;2234019]All very true. If the government were to institute a truly fair system they'd simply have a federal sales tax and eliminate income taxes altogether.

But unfortunately there's the way it ought to be, and there's the way it is. :([/QUOTE]

how is that fair?

Buying shoes for his kid and paying a tax on it means nothing to a man making 200k per year.

But a man making 40k would think twice.

parafly · 11-28-2007, 02:53 PM

[QUOTE=sourceworx;2234035]No they aren't. But by having a mandatory tax on our income, we really aren't free. If the government had a federal sales tax they'd be able to raise enough money all the municipalities we need. The system would be truly fair. The more you spend, the more taxes you pay.

The challenge is what items get taxed? Do you tax food, medication or other basic necessities?[/QUOTE]

What you are suggesting is the Fair Tax. Take a look at the link I posted above. Also, check it out on wikipedia.

Everything purchased gets taxed at 23%. Each month, you get a reimbursment for basic necessities up to the poverty level.

Buster · 11-28-2007, 02:56 PM

[QUOTE=sourceworx;2234035]No they aren't. But by having a mandatory tax on our income, we really aren't free. If the government had a federal sales tax they'd be able to raise enough money all the municipalities we need. The system would be truly fair. The more you spend, the more taxes you pay.

The challenge is what items get taxed? Do you tax food, medication or other basic necessities?[/QUOTE]

The man wrote "There is no justificiation for the government taking the fruits of your labor" that is what I responded to.

To answer your question with another...
In your mind a sales tax doesn't tax the fruit of your labor?

11-28-2007, 12:10 PM	#1
Warfish JetsInsider.com Legend Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 35,000	Taxes. Who Pays, How Much, How Much is Enough? A few stats I heard this morning on the radio, I'll leave the source unmentioned, as it's more fun that way...... [QUOTE]The Top 1% (Income Earners) of Taxpayers pays 37% of All Payroll Taxes. The Top 10% of Taxpayers pays 62% of Taxes. The Bottom 50% of Taxpayers pays 3% of Taxes.[/QUOTE] So the question is this: How much should the Top 1% on Income Earners contribute, as a percentage of total, to total Taxes in your ideal world? And how much, in that same ideal world, should the Bottom 50% contribute, as a percentage of the whole?

11-28-2007, 02:34 PM	#11
JetsCrazey All League Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 2,664	"The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax" -Albert Einstein Your taxes go towards fighting wars and paying interest to banks. They also go towards entitlement payments because the government can't manage an equitable financial system because such a system would involve ending favoritism in government. If we had a just financial system, entitlements wouldn't be necessary. The best tax is a flat tax...real flat like zero. Taxation = inefficient market distortion. There is no justificiation for the government taking the fruits of your labor. That is known as socialism, and it is the antithesis of freedom. Maybe someday the people in this country will stop watching the corporate-owned media and read some real political theory. Last edited by JetsCrazey; 11-28-2007 at 02:39 PM.

11-28-2007, 12:22 PM	#2
Winstonbiggs Jets Insider VIP Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 12,909	Based on those stats the top payers are paying less as a percentage than the percentage of wealth they have.

11-28-2007, 01:42 PM	#3
Oakliusmaximus Veteran Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Houston Posts: 453	Warfish - Great topic. I’ve been reading quite a bit about this recently. Personally, I have a problem with 50% of the population voting on issues that will hardly or not at all affect them but will negatively affect the other half of the population. What do they care if the government is massively over spending? There is no incentive for these people to keep politicians in line and every incentive for politicians to increase handouts. Here’s a good article by Walter Williams- [URL="http://www.townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2007/11/14/congressional_and_leftist_lies"]http://www.townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2007/11/14/congressional_and_leftist_lies[/URL] [QUOTE]The fact that there are so many American earners who have little or no financial stake in our country poses a serious political problem. The Tax Foundation estimates that 41 percent of whites, 56 percent of blacks, 59 percent of American Indian and Aleut Eskimo and 40 percent Asian and Pacific Islanders had no 2004 federal income tax liability. The study concluded, "When all of the dependents of these income-producing households are counted, there are roughly 122 million Americans -- 44 percent of the U.S. population -- who are outside of the federal income tax system." These people represent a natural constituency for big-spending politicians. In other words, if you have little or no financial stake in America, what do you care about the cost of massive federal spending programs? Similarly, what do you care about tax cuts if you're paying little or no taxes? In fact, you might be openly hostile toward tax cuts out of fear that they might lead to reductions in handout programs from which you benefit. Survey polls have confirmed this. According to The Harris Poll taken in June 2003, 51 percent of Democrats thought the tax cuts enacted by Congress were a bad thing while 16 percent of Republicans thought so. Among Democrats, 67 percent thought the tax cuts were unfair while 32 percent of Republicans thought so. When asked whether the $350 billion tax cut package will help your family finances, 59 percent of those surveyed said no and 35 percent said yes. Whether you're for or against President Bush matters little, but what do you think of politicians and their media dupes winning you over with lies about the rich not paying their fair share? And, by the way, $145,000 or even $345,000 a year hardly qualifies one as rich. It's not even yacht money. [/QUOTE]

11-28-2007, 01:44 PM	#4
jets5ever Hall Of Fame Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Boston Posts: 11,692	[QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;2233685]Based on those stats the top payers are paying less as a percentage than the percentage of wealth they have.[/QUOTE] Right, but we tax income, not wealth.

11-28-2007, 01:48 PM	#5
bitonti searching Hall Of Fame Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Philly Posts: 38,786	the problem in this country isn't the tax system it's the out of control spending. if we spend like we have spent in the last 8 years the tax rates lose meaning.

11-28-2007, 01:49 PM	#6
Warfish JetsInsider.com Legend Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 35,000	[QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;2233685]Based on those stats the top payers are paying less as a percentage than the percentage of wealth they have.[/QUOTE] Ok. But that doesn't answer the question, it just shows that we tax Income, not overall asset wealth (as George pointed out above). In terms of Income Percentiles, how much of the total Income Tax Burden should the top 1% of earners carry? The top 10% carry? The Bottom 50% carry? As you see it in your perfect tax world.

11-28-2007, 01:52 PM	#7
parafly so why side with anything? All Pro Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Colorado Posts: 6,280	In an ideal world, the Fair Tax would work nicely. [URL="http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer"]http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer[/URL]

11-28-2007, 02:16 PM	#8
PlumberKhan BRACE YOURSELVES FOR 12... Banned Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Van down by the river Posts: 21,013	[QUOTE=Oakliusmaximus;2233896]Personally, I have a problem with 50% of the population voting on issues that will hardly or not at all affect them but will negatively affect the other half of the population. [/QUOTE] WTF? And I'm sure the OTHER 50% of the population has a problem with the other side also. You know what they say.....Mo' Money, Mo' Problems. Deal with it. That is, after all, why that famous thingamajiggy says "...and to the Republic(not democracy) for which it stands..."

11-28-2007, 02:22 PM	#9
Sourceworx Hall Of Fame Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Long Island Posts: 13,411	I think the Fair Tax is a great idea, but the Government will never go for it. If we're going to keep a federal income tax system, I always thought the Flat Tax is the only truly fair system.

11-28-2007, 02:26 PM	#10
Buster not a rocket surgeon All League Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar Posts: 4,252	[QUOTE=sourceworx;2233982]I think the Fair Tax is a great idea, but the Government will never go for it. If we're going to keep a federal income tax system, I always thought the Flat Tax is the only truly fair system.[/QUOTE] Wouldn't the "fair tax" eliminate the mortgage deduction?

11-28-2007, 02:40 PM	#12
Buster not a rocket surgeon All League Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar Posts: 4,252	[QUOTE=JetsCrazey;2234003]"The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax" -Albert Einstein Your taxes go towards fighting wars and paying interest to banks. They also go towards entitlement payments because the government can't manage an equitable financial system because such a system would involve ending favoritism in government. If we had a just financial system, entitlements wouldn't be necessary. The best tax is a flat tax...real flat like zero. Taxation = inefficient market distortion. There is no justificiation for the government taking the fruits of your labor. That is known as socialism, and it is the antithesis of freedom.[/QUOTE] So building roads, schools, water treatment plants, paying for police and firemen etc are unjustified?

11-28-2007, 02:42 PM	#13
Sourceworx Hall Of Fame Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Long Island Posts: 13,411	[QUOTE=JetsCrazey;2234003]"The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax" -Albert Einstein Your taxes go towards fighting wars and paying interest to banks. They also go towards entitlement payments because the government can't manage an equitable financial system because such a system would involve ending favoritism in government. If we had a just financial system, entitlements wouldn't be necessary. The best tax is a flat tax...real flat like zero. Taxation = inefficient market distortion. There is no justificiation for the government taking the fruits of your labor. That is known as socialism, and it is the antithesis of freedom. Maybe someday the people in this country will stop watching the corporate-owned media and read some real political theory.[/QUOTE] All very true. If the government were to institute a truly fair system they'd simply have a federal sales tax and eliminate income taxes altogether. But unfortunately there's the way it ought to be, and there's the way it is. :(

11-28-2007, 02:44 PM	#14
Big L Plus six thousand posts Veteran Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: It's all relative Posts: 1,052	[QUOTE=JetsCrazey;2234003]The best tax is a flat tax...real flat like zero. Taxation = inefficient market distortion. [B]There is no justificiation for the government taking the fruits of your labor.[/B] That is known as socialism, and it is the antithesis of freedom. Maybe someday the people in this country will stop watching the corporate-owned media and read some real political theory.[/QUOTE] I'm not defending the gov, they're all a bunch of scvmbags, but one justification is your taxes pay for services you use every day, such as roads and brigdes, and to those of us who live in urban environments, water and sewage.

11-28-2007, 02:47 PM	#15
Big Blocker Banned Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 1,689	[QUOTE=JetsCrazey;2234003]"The hardest thing in the world to understand is the income tax" -Albert Einstein Your taxes go towards fighting wars and paying interest to banks. They also go towards entitlement payments because the government can't manage an equitable financial system because such a system would involve ending favoritism in government. If we had a just financial system, entitlements wouldn't be necessary. The best tax is a flat tax...real flat like zero. Taxation = inefficient market distortion. There is no justificiation for the government taking the fruits of your labor. That is known as socialism, and it is the antithesis of freedom. Maybe someday the people in this country will stop watching the corporate-owned media and read some real political theory.[/QUOTE] The so called fruits of your own labor have no value whatsoever outside of society. Taxes are the cost you pay to keep society going. Not to mention to protect you, your wealth and your sorry ass from those who otherwise would take it. Rights to property mean nothing without the law. Boy, people can really be dumb.

11-28-2007, 02:50 PM	#17
Big Blocker Banned Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 1,689	[QUOTE=sourceworx;2234035]No they aren't. But by having a mandatory tax on our income, we really aren't free. If the government had a federal sales tax they'd be able to raise enough money all the municipalities we need. The system would be truly fair. The more you spend, the more taxes you pay. The challenge is what items get taxed? Do you tax food, medication or other basic necessities?[/QUOTE] I don't see the problem with taxing income. First of all it's not as if you would make any money at all in the first place were there not a society to make it in. There is no income to make outside of that society. THen it should also be obvious that the people who are most benefitting from society have the greater stake in it's existence, even if they do not directly draw on the government for largesse.

11-28-2007, 02:52 PM	#18
Buster not a rocket surgeon All League Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar Posts: 4,252	[QUOTE=sourceworx;2234019]All very true. If the government were to institute a truly fair system they'd simply have a federal sales tax and eliminate income taxes altogether. But unfortunately there's the way it ought to be, and there's the way it is. :([/QUOTE] how is that fair? Buying shoes for his kid and paying a tax on it means nothing to a man making 200k per year. But a man making 40k would think twice.

11-28-2007, 02:53 PM	#19
parafly so why side with anything? All Pro Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Colorado Posts: 6,280	[QUOTE=sourceworx;2234035]No they aren't. But by having a mandatory tax on our income, we really aren't free. If the government had a federal sales tax they'd be able to raise enough money all the municipalities we need. The system would be truly fair. The more you spend, the more taxes you pay. The challenge is what items get taxed? Do you tax food, medication or other basic necessities?[/QUOTE] What you are suggesting is the Fair Tax. Take a look at the link I posted above. Also, check it out on wikipedia. Everything purchased gets taxed at 23%. Each month, you get a reimbursment for basic necessities up to the poverty level.

11-28-2007, 02:56 PM	#20
Buster not a rocket surgeon All League Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar Posts: 4,252	[QUOTE=sourceworx;2234035]No they aren't. But by having a mandatory tax on our income, we really aren't free. If the government had a federal sales tax they'd be able to raise enough money all the municipalities we need. The system would be truly fair. The more you spend, the more taxes you pay. The challenge is what items get taxed? Do you tax food, medication or other basic necessities?[/QUOTE] The man wrote "There is no justificiation for the government taking the fruits of your labor" that is what I responded to. To answer your question with another... In your mind a sales tax doesn't tax the fruit of your labor?