• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

45% of Americans Do Not Contribute Any Federal Income Taxes...

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

MajinCry

Platinum Member
Jul 28, 2015
2,488
557
136
Not even sure if it is that sometimes, a lot of people will just casually pass over a good comment now and then and it will get lost in a lot of knee jerk reactions where people do not read older posts.

I just gets lost in the flood sometimes.

But I've had many of mine just get passed that way a lot.

Looks Zork is on a roll. He seems a bit miffed off.
Does he ever read what he types? He's going waaaaay out there with the crazy.
 

TLScrappy

Member
Aug 9, 2001
164
0
0
The way I see it is one side says its the top 1% fault, the other the lower class. Regardless of that, I am for THE MIDDLE CLASS. Once the middle class disappears, so does the USA.
 

bozack

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2000
7,913
12
81
A) Stick around? Who the fuck cares! Where are they going to go?



B) LOL! So you think the rich will decide to stop making money because instead of making millions they now make a million that that's no longer worth their effort? Please!



And btw, no one is proposing a high tax like 75% like France tried (which, btw, had little impact in terms of causing a mass exodus of rich people).

They pay the lions share of taxes now, if the tax climate gets hostile enough clearly these are the folks who have the means to relocate themselves and given their current financial situation I would presume a fair share of places would gladly take them as residents

I in no way said or implied that the rich will "stop making money" as you inferred, what I said was they will effectively be the sole contributors paying for all government services and asked:

1. there was a possibility that the tax burden could get so high that it knocks folks on the edge of say 20% out of their current demographics and makes the pool of those paying in even smaller

2. How do you keep them from controlling government since they will be the only ones funding it?

3. And lastly when will folks demanding they pay more be content with them paying "enough" or is there no limit to this?
 
Last edited:

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
103,527
18,084
136
I'm still not sure why you even bother posting in P&N most of the time really.

You normally make no sense at all.
Zork is basically having an open conversation between himself and his whiskey bottle.

If you accept that he is never actually responding to anyone, much less involved in the actual conversation going on in whichever thread his blurry mouse aims at that particular moment, in between hiccups, he makes much more sense.

:thumbsup:
 

Ackmed

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2003
8,311
301
126
They don't contribute, but sure as hell get a refund which boggles the mind. Meanwhile we have to pay a little over $1,200.
 
Last edited:

cbrunny

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 2007
6,791
404
121
so 45% don't contribute - isn't that a fault of the system rather than the individual?
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
101,020
4,766
126
My liking for a sales tax isn't based on equality of results, it's based on two other things. First, I prefer that government tax economic activity rather than income because that encourages saving and investment. Second, a national sales tax (at the least, replacing the corporate income tax) taxes imported goods. Added to the country of origin's taxes, that would make American-made goods more likely taxed when sold in America. If we can't bring back manufacturing jobs, let's at least fund government with all those outsourced jobs.

I actually support indexing long term capital gains. Last thing I want is to further discourage long term investment.
income isn't economic activity?



what's hilarious (or maybe sad) is that the GOP kicked a lot of people off the income tax rolls (and bragged about it, removed 1 in every 5 income taxpaying families off the tax rolls), and is now complaining about it! mitt complained that the GOP's message of lower taxes doesn't resonate with a lot of people because they pay no income taxes. the GOP's solution to that "problem" is, apparently, to levy taxes on poor people. increase their taxes so you can tell them you're going to cut their taxes! genius!
 
Last edited:

marsspirit123

Member
May 31, 2009
32
0
0
One problem with all this, because taxes are :
1. federal
2. state
3. sales tax
4. local tax
5. property tax ( included in rent )
6. vehicle taxes ( registration , license,stickers)
7. School registrations for kids
8. Any taxers or fees on utility bills.
and so on.
Add all this and then compare who pays more as % of income.
Is it the rich, the poor or the middle class?
 
Last edited:

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,820
1,123
126
Don't confuse some kid who just did his first set of Taxes and blames poor people that he has to pay them. Typical low infoTard...
 

nickqt

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2015
6,023
4,087
136
They pay the lions share of taxes now, if the tax climate gets hostile enough clearly these are the folks who have the means to relocate themselves and given their current financial situation I would presume a fair share of places would gladly take them as residents

I in no way said or implied that the rich will "stop making money" as you inferred, what I said was they will effectively be the sole contributors paying for all government services and asked:

1. there was a possibility that the tax burden could get so high that it knocks folks on the edge of say 20% out of their current demographics and makes the pool of those paying in even smaller

2. How do you keep them from controlling government since they will be the only ones funding it?

3. And lastly when will folks demanding they pay more be content with them paying "enough" or is there no limit to this?
Tax rates are as low as they've been in close to a century. If the richest people in the solar system, who owe their success to the fact that they grew up in a first world country with all of the fredoms, benefits, and opportunities that they otherwise wouldn't have had, feel the need to move elsewhere because boo hoo they're paying close to 15% of their income in taxes...

Then let them go. They truly don't give a shit about their country or their countrymen. Let them abscond to Somalia, or a yacht in international waters, if paying 15% of their income in taxes is just too heavy of a burden for these multi-billionaires and multimillionaires.

It's ok. The rest of us will be just fine without them siphoning almost 99% of economic growth into their bank accounts to hand over to Wall St. criminals to inflate bubbles that the rest of us have to eventually pay for.

It's always entertaining to read about how the poor, poor, richest people in the solar system are so persecuted in the US today, what, with paying close to 15% of their income in taxes and all.
 

DrPizza

Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
Administrator
Mar 5, 2001
49,619
160
111
www.slatebrookfarm.com
Right, because the bottom 45% is paid minimum wage :rolleyes:

No one is asking for the lower class to pay 30%. Not 20%. Not even 10%. We simply expect the majority of the population to not be leech on society. Is that so much to ask? I can understand the bottom 5% that is trying to recover from stressful situations, but when 1-20% is leeching. 20-40% is leeching... all the while pointing the finger that others aren't paying enough taxes.... well, it gets to the point where it's just laughable that you honestly consider their retarded opinions.
No, them bottom 45% isn't paid minimum wage. But, after you go through retirees, people who can't work because they're disabled, etc., and then get to the minimum wage, then I suspect you're getting closer to 45%.
 

highland145

Lifer
Oct 12, 2009
40,472
3,542
136
No, them bottom 45% isn't paid minimum wage. But, after you go through retirees, people who can't work because they're disabled, etc., and then get to the minimum wage, then I suspect you're getting closer to 45%.
those :) these :| we :\


but I would sure like to see some collated #s using EITC, AFDC, obummerphone, and any other assistance to get a real number.

And illegal benefits that the govt is covering.

What would greatly increase tax coming into the tax pot would be giving employed working illegals a path to citizenship.
sportage, your brain is in your shoe.

Stop stepping on it.
 
Last edited:

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
28,200
8,044
136
They pay the lions share of taxes now, if the tax climate gets hostile enough clearly these are the folks who have the means to relocate themselves and given their current financial situation I would presume a fair share of places would gladly take them as residents

And? They have the means now and there are plenty of countries they can relocate to now where their taxes would be lower, why aren't they leaving now?

I in no way said or implied that the rich will "stop making money" as you inferred, what I said was they will effectively be the sole contributors paying for all government services and asked:

What you aren't getting is that I think your premise is bullshit.

1. there was a possibility that the tax burden could get so high that it knocks folks on the edge of say 20% out of their current demographics and makes the pool of those paying in even smaller

You are simply rephrasing the same question.

2. How do you keep them from controlling government since they will be the only ones funding it?

They pay 90% of the taxes now do you think they aren't controlling government now? That's pretty naïve. Do you think if they paid zero taxes their control of government would drop? I don't.

3. And lastly when will folks demanding they pay more be content with them paying "enough" or is there no limit to this?
Are you saying everyone's pay should be limited simply because they might demand more in the future or is that something you think should only apply to the poor and middle-class?

I don't think you've fully thought through your position. Perhaps you can research it to see if what you think will happen, actually happens.
 
Last edited:

bozack

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2000
7,913
12
81
Tax rates are as low as they've been in close to a century. If the richest people in the solar system, who owe their success to the fact that they grew up in a first world country with all of the fredoms, benefits, and opportunities that they otherwise wouldn't have had, feel the need to move elsewhere because boo hoo they're paying close to 15% of their income in taxes...
Re read my post, it was a question, at what point are those who are the top earners deemed paying enough, and if taxes are raised to that level what is the chance they start to consider their options.

Then let them go. They truly don't give a shit about their country or their countrymen. Let them abscond to Somalia, or a yacht in international waters, if paying 15% of their income in taxes is just too heavy of a burden for these multi-billionaires and multimillionaires.
And if this happens then who starts to pay?

It's ok. The rest of us will be just fine without them siphoning almost 99% of economic growth into their bank accounts to hand over to Wall St. criminals to inflate bubbles that the rest of us have to eventually pay for.
So you would be comfortable either paying more or getting reduced services?

It's always entertaining to read about how the poor, poor, richest people in the solar system are so persecuted in the US today, what, with paying close to 15% of their income in taxes and all.
This isn't about persecution, this is a question...again at what point will there effective tax rate be high enough for folks to consider them actually "paying their fair share" or will it never be enough...sounds like from the tone of your post it is the latter.

And? They have the means now and there are plenty of countries they can relocate to now where their taxes would be lower, why aren't they leaving now?
Taxes haven't been raised yet, again it was a question.. at what point, or what percentage will folks be comfortable with the wealthy and taxes or will it never be deemed enough?

What you aren't getting is that I think your premise is bullshit.
what I am getting is that you're not that bright, or have difficulty with answering simple questions, or just don't have an answer...

You are simply rephrasing the same question.
well you don't seem to be smart enough to answer it the first time so...

They pay 90% of the taxes now do you think they aren't controlling government now? That's pretty naïve. Do you think if they paid zero taxes their control of government would drop? I don't.
I think I implied this in my initial post but my question was how do folks keep that situation from getting worse...if they are the sole revenue stream for the country, and they opt to remain residents, why wouldn't they expect government to work for their interests over everyone else and how would the masses control that?

Are you saying everyone's pay should be limited simply because they might demand more in the future or is that something you think should only apply to the poor and middle-class?
no I am not saying that at all, again this is where it seems reading comprehension fails you....what I am asking is what percentage is considered "enough" for the wealthy to be paying their fair share?...I don't think this should be hard but for some reason you seem unwilling or afraid to answer it....

I don't think you've fully thought through your position. Perhaps you can research it to see if what you think will happen, actually happens.
I don't have a position, it is a question.
 

JockoJohnson

Golden Member
May 20, 2009
1,397
48
91
If US shifts more tax burden from the rich to the poor like Republicans want, the economy will suffer big time, since poor have higher propensity to spend incremental dollar than rich.
^This. It works out better that poor people don't pay the tax discussed by the OP. It puts more money back into the system probably more efficiently than if the gov't did get it.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
60,235
12,744
136
Re read my post, it was a question, at what point are those who are the top earners deemed paying enough,
When the budget deficit is covered. If we want to bring down government spending, then that spending has to hurt. And the people it has to hurt are the people that matter. In our system, the people that matter are the rich. Therefore, if we tax the holy hell out of the rich to fully cover government spending, the spending will come down. As long as the rich can get richer off of government debt, the debt will grow. So tax away.
 

thraashman

Lifer
Apr 10, 2000
10,898
1,042
126
I figured the word was "retarded".
Considering in the post I'd already used the word "retarded", I was joking that I was using it as an insult and that I then realized he is in fact developmentally disabled and thus the word is inappropriate. Disappoint was joking that there is an interchangeability between the word Republicans and the word Retarded, but that Republican is an even more offensive word to call someone. Like, did this seriously go over your head man?
so 45% don't contribute - isn't that a fault of the system rather than the individual?
It's a feature of the system, not a fault. Most of these people make so little money that if they paid anything in taxes they'd have difficulty, or in some cases an inability, to survive. You tax a man making $15k a year at 10%, they could easily lose their ability to live. You tax a man making $50 million at 75%, he still lives in total luxury with no worries whatsoever. So taxing them at the about 40% that is the current top tax bracket, they don't even feel it. But instead they use that money to convince the simpletons like the OP that it's the poor who are the problem as they find ways to avoid paying taxes.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,183
60
91
I have thought for a long time that only retired people and people that can prove they paid federal taxes should be allowed to vote. This is based on the principle that only those making the money should have a say in how the money is spent.
 

piasabird

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
17,183
60
91
When you say something like "Tax a man who makes $15K it sounds like it is horrible. However the standard deduction and the personal deduction for yourself and any other family members means you probably will not pay any taxes. If a person has a child and works then they also get the Earned income credit, which with 2-3 children is about a tax return refund of about $8k.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY