Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room
Stop the Machine! (anyone seen this?)
Rover:
Proportionally, the higher your income the more your tax rate.
Some numbers:
$50k annual income pays ~18% Fed tax (that might be way off.. I haven't see the tax tables lately) Which would be ~ $9,000 taxes
$100k annual income pays ~23% Fed tax (again the % may be off) which would be ~ $23,000 taxes.
"The top 10 percent of income earners pay the most in federal taxes. Sixty-eight percent of federal revenue is generated by this group."-Rover (August 13, 2011, 05:00 PM)
--- End quote ---
Except, keep going up the income ladder and the model breaks down. Check out what Warren Buffet and any given hedge fund manager pays (less than 14%), and when the richest 400 Americans make more money than the next 150,000,000 million Americans, they should pay their fair share or go live somewhere else. If you make a million dollars, you won't be paying 23%, I promise you.-zridling (August 14, 2011, 10:35 AM)
--- End quote ---
I like to see the source for the 14% numbers. Even if that is accurate, do you not consider someone -- say Bill Gates -- who makes 100 Million giving 14 million to the federal government fair? I'll never pay 14 million over my life time (or probably my children and grand children). They pay that EVERY year.
Oh well, I've been all over the income ranges, and I get screwed no matter where I'm at!
--- End quote ---
Me too! Nothing like seeing your tax money go to support things you disagree with -- whatever they are.
Which I think is the real problem. The Fed. Gov't. spends too dang (cleaned that up for the kids) much money. They spend more than they take in. The have a standard budget increase built in every year. Some (not all) of those spending cuts they just approved were actually just increases they didn't make.
Dave Ramsey has a great article about this: Federal Budget
If their household income was $55,000 per year, they’d actually be spending $96,500—$41,500 more than they made! That means they’re spending 175% of their annual income! So, in 2011 they’d add $41,500 of debt to their current credit card debt of $366,000!
--- End quote ---
That's insane. All of this pointing fingers to Warren Buffet and "the Rich" is a distraction. Washington is spending this country into bankruptcy and they want us to support their plan to steal money from "the Rich" to cover it. It's a basic redistribution of wealth scheme and it is a socialist policy.
I am against socialism.
Shades:
@Rover:
At this link you can read the thoughts of Warren E. Buffett about the tax matter. Straight from the horses mouth...well, written down by the (business section of) New York Times.
Rover:
Mr. Buffett is free to write a check anytime he feels the need. If he feels so guilty about all the money he make he should ended his article with "So I'm sending my first payment as a gesture of good faith. $10 million dollars payable to the IRS."
So now he pays 17%. Still paying 6.9 million per year. What is that the Federal Government provides that costs so much more to do for Warren Buffet than me?
The fact still stands the the top few percent of income earners still pay the lion's share (in actual dollars) of the federal tax.
My point is still that the federal government spending is out of control* and needs to be scaled back a lot. *This is not just the current administration although they are the worst by far. Spending has been running away since Bush 1.
I do feel the wealthiest people in our country have an obligation to do more. Bill and Belinda Gates set up a charity to do just that. It's about only thing I like about Bill.
I do not think it's the federal governments job to re-distribute wealth. Nor does the Constitution give them power to do so.
I guess we'll see how everyone else feels in Nov. 2012.
Shades:
Sorry for not letting it rest.
Although I see your point and actually agree with practically all of it, there is something nagging.
Taken from the U.S. Census bureau:
In 2009 there were 117,181,000 households in the US. The phrase that keeps returning is: "the top 1% controls 95% of the money in the US"
So that leaves a solid 116 million households. How much Federal taxes are for each of those households I don't know, but assume that when on average each of these households pays 1000 USD/year, there would be 116,000,000,000 USD/year on tax revenue.
How can one say that the rich pay the lion share? (yes, I am fully aware that this projection of numbers is way too simple)
Then again, such numbers also mean that taxing the rich more will not make much of dent either. So government spending is the major issue.
Hmmm, how many secret agencies you you really need? The US military machine is also quite costly. Spent a few less percentage points (single digit!) less on these and invest that money in infrastructure (more jobs), alternative energy sources (more high-tech jobs).
Everyone is better off for it (incl. the rich, so I truly don't understand why the Tea party gets their knickers in such a twist about tax increases if the need arises).
If the above makes me a socialist simpleton, so be it. Live and let live.
tomos:
@Rover,
one of the reasons people are focusing on the rich is because of the imbalance that is getting ever more extreme between the rich and the poor. I actually think you're right, the solution is not to tax the rich more (although living where I do, I find 17% or even, God forbid, 23%, laughably low tax rates).**
But if this problem is not addressed, society as we know it will collapse, like in the 1920's/30's, maybe worse, maybe better, probably differently.
Unfortunately I dont have a solution, but first people/governments have to acknowledge it as a problem before things can even think about changing...
** I'm reminded of the old emmigrant song "The Green Fields of Amerikay/Canada"
Then it's pack up your seastores and tarry no longer
Ten dollars a week isn't very bad pay;
With no taxes or tithes to devour up your wages
When you're on the green fields of Amerikay
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version