Bush Tax breaks for the "rich"

[Gawain 0]

Quote

How do you feel about multi-millionaire investment fund managers paying tax at a far lower rate than you do?

They still pay more than I do. The top 25% earners pay more in income tax than the other 75% combined.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

Quote

How do you feel about multi-millionaire investment fund managers paying tax at a far lower rate than you do?

They still pay more than I do. The top 25% earners pay more in income tax than the other 75% combined.

Of course they do - they have more to begin with. They also benefit more, as Warren B. tells us.

Willy Sutton strikes again.


George "I am a conservative*" Bush's 2009 budget proposal is $3.1 TRILLION. That's about $10,300 for every man, woman and child in the USA. Expecting every man, woman and child regardless of income to cough up $10,300 in federal taxes alone is just an absurd idea, there would be mass starvation. The only possible way to fund the government is with a progressive tax structure.

* G.W. Bush, in "A Charge to Keep", 1999

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[KJM 0]

Your post again doesnt make sense. You are not making your business decision based on the tax code, you are just getting a total write off on the money you spent doing business. And when you lower the corporate tax rate, it does nothing but influence my decision to pocket my profits rather than reinvest that money in my corp in order to reduce my tax liability. Its called the "cost of money"

[TankBuster 0]

Quote

Your post again doesnt make sense. You are not making your business decision based on the tax code, you are just getting a total write off on the money you spent doing business. And when you lower the corporate tax rate, it does nothing but influence my decision to pocket my profits rather than reinvest that money in my corp in order to reduce my tax liability. Its called the "cost of money"

Maybe I'm not understanding your question. THe only thing I get 100% write offs on are expenses. If I'm actully making money, I'll have to pay tax on it, corporate income tax if I leave it in the corporation, and income tax if I pull it out to buy shoes for the baby. My decision to invest that money (or work more, etc) has everything to do with the return I'll get, now or later. The progressive income tax and corporate tax significantly reduces that for me, so at some point it's just not worth my time or my capital. If you lower either tax, I can take more of my own money and make it work to create a larger income stream. That investment, on the larger scale, grows the economy. But again, lower income tax is not my long term goal.

Look into the FairTax.

The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer.

[KelliJ 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Here are some interesting data on where federal tax money goes. The richest households are actually taking more than the middle classes.

I'm going to volunteer some help, Professor. (Yeah, I know...who woulda thunk)
The chart you posted is compelling, but would be even more so if, instead of just showing where the dollars went, it also showed where those dollars came from, i.e. Joe Smith paid $10,000 in taxes and got back $12,000 in services.

You are at liberty to post it.

However, it shows very clearly that the "generic taxpayer" isn't just supporting the poor, she's also supporting the wealthy.

I was trying to help you out by suggesting a modification to your post. You don't need to cop an attitude.
Your graph is meaningless as is since it only tells half the story.

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

Quote

Your post again doesnt make sense. You are not making your business decision based on the tax code, you are just getting a total write off on the money you spent doing business. And when you lower the corporate tax rate, it does nothing but influence my decision to pocket my profits rather than reinvest that money in my corp in order to reduce my tax liability. Its called the "cost of money"

Maybe I'm not understanding your question. THe only thing I get 100% write offs on are expenses. If I'm actully making money, I'll have to pay tax on it, corporate income tax if I leave it in the corporation, and income tax if I pull it out to buy shoes for the baby. My decision to invest that money (or work more, etc) has everything to do with the return I'll get, now or later. The progressive income tax and corporate tax significantly reduces that for me, so at some point it's just not worth my time or my capital. If you lower either tax, I can take more of my own money and make it work to create a larger income stream. That investment, on the larger scale, grows the economy. But again, lower income tax is not my long term goal.

Look into the FairTax.

According to Bush it will take $3.1 Trillion to run the country next year (President's 2009 budget proposal).

Where EXACTLY do you think that should come from?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Here are some interesting data on where federal tax money goes. The richest households are actually taking more than the middle classes.

I'm going to volunteer some help, Professor. (Yeah, I know...who woulda thunk)
The chart you posted is compelling, but would be even more so if, instead of just showing where the dollars went, it also showed where those dollars came from, i.e. Joe Smith paid $10,000 in taxes and got back $12,000 in services.

You are at liberty to post it.

However, it shows very clearly that the "generic taxpayer" isn't just supporting the poor, she's also supporting the wealthy.

I was trying to help you out by suggesting a modification to your post. You don't need to cop an attitude.
Your graph is meaningless as is since it only tells half the story.

Complain to the Tax Foundation then. It's their graph.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[KelliJ 0]

You posted it.

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

You posted it.

And you can post the data you wish to post. That's how forums work.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[KelliJ 0]

Quote

Quote

You posted it.

And you can post the data you wish to post. That's how forums work.

Try this on for size. It is from your very own suggestion, The Tax Foundation.
Seems your little graph is, shall we say, "misleading".
http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/wp1.pdf

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

Quote

Quote

You posted it.

And you can post the data you wish to post. That's how forums work.

Try this on for size. It is from your very own suggestion, The Tax Foundation.
Seems your little graph is, shall we say, "misleading".
http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/wp1.pdf

Nothing misleading about it. Same graph appears in the document you linked.

It debunks the right wing MYTH that our tax dollars are going exclusively to support the undeserving poor. Our tax dollar handouts are actually spread pretty uniformly, with the WEALTHY getting somewhat more than the middle class.

According to Bush it will take $3.1 Trillion to run the country next year (President's 2009 budget proposal). Your share, Kelli, will be around $10,300.

Bush predicts a shortfall of around $400BILLION (revenues less than expenditures).

Where EXACTLY do you think that should come from? Increased taxes on the poor? What would Jesus recommend?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

You posted it.

And you can post the data you wish to post. That's how forums work.

Try this on for size. It is from your very own suggestion, The Tax Foundation.
Seems your little graph is, shall we say, "misleading".
http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/wp1.pdf

Figure 8, page 31 says it all.

edit to add: Figure 9, page 33 too...

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[TheAnvil 0]

How about reducing spending?

What a radical idea...who's going to be the first to recommend reform of our non-discretionary spending?

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[kallend 1,623]

Let me remind you AGAIN about Willy Sutton. If you need money, you go where it is to be found. You can't raise $3.1 TRILLION by going to homeless shelters and soup kitchens.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

How about reducing spending?

What a radical idea...who's going to be the first to recommend reform of our non-discretionary spending?

We could take about $300 Billion from the Pentagon and they'll still have more "defense" money than the next 5 7 nations combined.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gawain 0]

Quote

Let me remind you AGAIN about Willy Sutton. If you need money, you go where it is to be found. You can't raise $3.1 TRILLION by going to homeless shelters and soup kitchens.

...and I will not play into your drama.

You keep changing the subject. We're talking about taxes. You're talking about the budget. I've already stated that Congress is spending out of control, and the President is too readily letting it happen.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[KelliJ 0]

Nothing Misleading? Uniform distribution? Where the hell do you get that BS from?

"We find households in the lowest quintile of income
received roughly $8.21 in federal, state and local government spending for every dollar of
taxes paid in 2004, while households in the middle quintile received $1.30, and
households in the top quintile received $0.41."
I would expect college professors who fly their own airplane using public airports and ATC get a few dollars more in government services each year than a family supporting themselves and living just above the poverty level.

It's right there, Professor. Lowest quintile get more than $8 back in gov. spending for each $1 paid in taxes while the top quintile get back 41 cents. What is uniform about that?
The report shows that, contrary to what you have been claiming even in the face of this report from A SITE YOU RECOMMENDED, the wealthy do support the poor, including the undeserving poor. You claim is bogus and unsupported.

Of course we need to collect more taxes from the wealthier segment of society than from the poor. That we agree on. But you don't need to go posting misleading and incomplete information.

You say my share will be $10,300? GOOD!

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

Quote

Let me remind you AGAIN about Willy Sutton. If you need money, you go where it is to be found. You can't raise $3.1 TRILLION by going to homeless shelters and soup kitchens.

...and I will not play into your drama.

You keep changing the subject. We're talking about taxes. You're talking about the budget. I've already stated that Congress is spending out of control, and the President is too readily letting it happen.

Taxes are what provide the revenue for the budget. It doesn't matter what you cut, you still have to raise revenue, and going to the poor is not an effective way of raising it.

Uncoupling revenues from expenditures is why we have a HUGE debt. Simple, really.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[TheAnvil 0]

I've got a GREAT idea for some extra cash!

A Windfall Union Donations Tax!

Since a bunch of dumb-fucks are whiskey bent and hell bound on taking $$ from oil companies who have record profits via an abomination called a windfall profits tax - the same dumb-fucks who don't know the difference between profit and profit margin - they should be oh so happy for a Windfall Union Donations Tax! After all, if those unions have so much $ to donate to political campaigns, which is not the core function of any union, then they most assuredly have a few extra $$ to contribute to the federal budget.

ROFLMAO! Bwaaaaaahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaa!!!!!!! Somebody should propose that on the national level every time some dumb bastard mentions that stupid tax on the oil companies, just to watch the left wingers squirm!

I'm such a sexy JACKASS when I apply myself. Sometimes I stand on my step ladder to look in the mirror and shave and think to myself - HOT DAMN AM I ONE SEEEEEXY JACKASS!!!!!!!!

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

Nothing Misleading? Uniform distribution? Where the hell do you get that BS from?

"We find households in the lowest quintile of income
received roughly $8.21 in federal, state and local government spending for every dollar of
taxes paid in 2004, while households in the middle quintile received $1.30, and
households in the top quintile received $0.41."
I would expect college professors who fly their own airplane using public airports and ATC get a few dollars more in government services each year than a family supporting themselves and living just above the poverty level.

It's right there, Professor. Lowest quintile get more than $8 back in gov. spending for each $1 paid in taxes while the top quintile get back 41 cents. What is uniform about that?
The report shows that, contrary to what you have been claiming even in the face of this report from A SITE YOU RECOMMENDED, the wealthy do support the poor, including the undeserving poor. You claim is bogus and unsupported.

"My claim" came from the exact same document "your claim" came from.
Now you're being silly.

Quote

Of course we need to collect more taxes from the wealthier segment of society than from the poor. That we agree on. But you don't need to go posting misleading and incomplete information.

IRONY! Why are you using the same source, if you don't believe my source?

Quote

You say my share will be $10,300? GOOD!

Won't happen. And those of us fortunate enough to be able to pay our share should do so without whining and bellyaching about those who can't.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

Somebody should propose that on the national level every time some dumb bastard mentions that stupid tax on the oil companies, just to watch the left wingers squirm!

SOMEBODY should? Why don't YOU do the work. I look forward to reading your op-eds.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[TheAnvil 0]

Moi? A congressman I'm not...though I DID just email the idea to Neal Boortz, my favorite political commentator. Perhaps I'll shoot a line to my congressmen and senators as well. The idea IS ingenious and would make the socialists who propose such moronic taxes look like fools to everyone and not just those of us with three digit IQs...

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[KelliJ 0]

The difference being when you referenced the source you conveniently left out the ratio of dollars paid/dollars received. I used that ratio to correct your misconception that the wealthy are the beneficiaries of a disproportionate amount of government spending and, in fact, showed you that the poor are the ones who collect a disproportionate amount of services.
There is enough reason to justify a progressive tax scale without having to toss around misleading information. Next time try to be a bit more careful.
It is rare that I ever complain about paying taxes. I believe in a progressive tax for two simple reasons.
1: Collecting taxes from the poor is like squeezing blood from a turnip...ya just ain't gonna git much.
2: The old saying "it takes money to make money" is very true. Once one has some extra funds to play around with and invest, the amount of effort expended to earn each additional dollar becomes less. I worked hard to get to the point where I don't have to work at all. I have a good income and don't mind paying a bit more in taxes than someone who is still trying to make their way in the world.
Like I said, I agree with you on this for the most part. I just feel you are hurting your case by presenting incomplete and therefor misleading data.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Oh, and another thing, we spend about 250 billion annually ($900 for every man, woman and child) to comply with the current tax code. That money is wasted - there's no productivity in it.

My accountant and tax lawyers might feel differently. As would their families, and people that sell stuff to them.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kallend 1,623]

Quote

The difference being when you referenced the source you conveniently left out the ratio of dollars paid/dollars received. I used that ratio to correct your misconception that the wealthy are the beneficiaries of a disproportionate amount of government spending and, in fact, showed you that the poor are the ones who collect a disproportionate amount of services.
There is enough reason to justify a progressive tax scale without having to toss around misleading information. Next time try to be a bit more careful.
It is rare that I ever complain about paying taxes. I believe in a progressive tax for two simple reasons.
1: Collecting taxes from the poor is like squeezing blood from a turnip...ya just ain't gonna git much.
2: The old saying "it takes money to make money" is very true. Once one has some extra funds to play around with and invest, the amount of effort expended to earn each additional dollar becomes less. I worked hard to get to the point where I don't have to work at all. I have a good income and don't mind paying a bit more in taxes than someone who is still trying to make their way in the world.
Like I said, I agree with you on this for the most part. I just feel you are hurting your case by presenting incomplete and therefor misleading data.

You are trying to show something different than I was. I am NOT responsible for making your arguments.

My POINT, to which your complaint is totally irrelevant, is that tax dollars go to families across the board, and the wealthiest families get more than middle class families.

Now, ON AGGREGATE the poor get more, but that's just because there are more of them. But considered as individual units, wealthy familes get more than middle class families and nearly as much as poor families (see Table 8 of YOUR link). THAT was my point, THAT was what I wrote, and my post was NOT misleading except to someone who wanted to be misled.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.