• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

From "No taxation without representation" to "Representation without taxation."

A

Apple Of Sodom

Golden Member
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=529854

Good read. Basically the author states that 47% of U.S. households pay no federal income tax and that the top 10% of taxpayers provide 75% of tax revenue.

Discussing how fair taxes are or aren't has been done hundreds of times on here. That isn't what this thread is about.

I think that every American citizen should have to pay some sort of federal income tax, even if what they pay is a tear in the salty sea. This is so we all contribute and we all feel the contribution in our pocket books, even if it is only $50 for the entire tax year.

I believe that refunds/rebates/tax credits should not be given to those who have not paid into the system - i.e. if you contributed $0 into the income tax system, you should not receive money back from the IRS.

How would government spending be changed if everyone was required to pay at least a small amount of tax? Would those that currently pay no tax (47% of U.S. households) but vote for government spending start to feel like they are getting ripped off when it is their money being spent and it is no longer Other People's Money?
 
Last edited:
Apple Of Sodom said:
-snip-
I think that every American citizen should have to pay some sort of federal income tax, even if what they pay is a tear in the salty sea. This is so we all contribute and we all feel the contribution in our pocket books, even if it is only $50 for the entire tax year.
Click to expand...

I agree that everybody with income, no matter how low, should pay at least a token amount. When something is free people don't appreciate it or respect it. I think there would be a benefical psychological effect, I suspect even if someone's tax went up only by only $10 they'd at least pause to consider if some promised government supplied benefit was worth the cost. As it stands now I don't why 50% would even give a damn, it will cost them nothing.


Apple Of Sodom said:
I believe that refunds/rebates/tax credits should not be given to those who have not paid into the system - i.e. if you contributed $0 into the income tax system, you should not receive money back from the IRS.
Click to expand...

Since "welfare" has become a political toxic term, Congress has basterdized the income tax system to provide welfare type payments calling them "refundable tax credits" and using the IRS to administer them as a means of obfuscation and administrative convenience.

Apple Of Sodom said:
How would government spending be changed if everyone was required to pay at least a small amount of tax? Would those that pay no tax but vote for government spending start to feel like they are getting ripped off?
Click to expand...

See above

Fern
 
Brainonska511 said:
But let's not mention payroll taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes on various goods.....
Click to expand...

Payroll "taxes" are not really taxes, they are insurance premiums and compulsory retirement savings and will be paid back to "tax payer" as they use that service eventually.

Sales taxes do not fund our federal government.

So I agree with you, lets not mention those because they are not relevant to the discussion.
 
Brainonska511 said:
But let's not mention payroll taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes on various goods.....
Click to expand...

Payroll taxes are refunded (i.e., some working people don't pay them) via the Earned Income Credit.

Sales taxes are a state/local issue, not relevent to national policy/politics.

Excise taxes are, by definition, hidden taxes, 'out-of-sight is out-of-mind'. Therefore they're no help (i.e., they're irrelevent) in achieving the object(s) sought by having people pay at least a little in income taxes.

Fern
 
Brainonska511 said:
But let's not mention payroll taxes, sales taxes, excise taxes on various goods.....
Click to expand...

Those taxes were mentioned in the article. But those taxes aren't what is paying for military spending, , health care, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, housing assistance, federal employee retirement, etc, etc.

How about answer this: why should 47% of the households pay no income tax yet still have the ability to vote for increasing government spending?
 
Last edited:
Apple Of Sodom said:
Those taxes were mentioned in the article. But those taxes aren't what is paying for military spending, social security, health care, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, housing assistance, etc, etc.

How about answer this: why should 47% of the households pay no income tax yet still have the ability to vote for increasing government spending?
Click to expand...

Ummm, payroll "taxes" do fund social security and medicare.
 
Well... I hardly call Capitol Hill representation. I mean I know that's what it's supposed to be, but our politicians stopped being our representatives a long time ago as far as I'm concerned.
 
Apple Of Sodom said:
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=529854

Good read. Basically the author states that 47% of U.S. households pay no federal income tax and that the top 10% of taxpayers provide 75% of tax revenue.

Discussing how fair taxes are or aren't has been done hundreds of times on here. That isn't what this thread is about.

I think that every American citizen should have to pay some sort of federal income tax, even if what they pay is a tear in the salty sea. This is so we all contribute and we all feel the contribution in our pocket books, even if it is only $50 for the entire tax year.

I believe that refunds/rebates/tax credits should not be given to those who have not paid into the system - i.e. if you contributed $0 into the income tax system, you should not receive money back from the IRS.

How would government spending be changed if everyone was required to pay at least a small amount of tax? Would those that currently pay no tax (47% of U.S. households) but vote for government spending start to feel like they are getting ripped off when it is their money being spent and it is no longer Other People's Money?
Click to expand...

When someone called "Apple of Sodom" posts a link that reads "NewsAndAnal...", I fear to click the link. 😀

I think the author's info is outdated; there was a headline on Drudge recently that over half of all US households pay no federal income taxes. Couple that with roughly half of all US households receiving a government check and it's clear that the Democrats have won the battle for society; a slight majority of people now have every reason to vote themselves bennies paid for by others and absolutely no reason to call for fiscal responsibility. That's why I predict that regardless of how the 2010 & 2012 elections turn out, overall the progressive side has taken our society and we'll continue down this road until we suddenly can't buy a loan and our society (or at least our economy) collapses. Personally I agree with Fern, everyone should pay something and SEE the money go out. That's why I so like the FairTax - even if the government furnishes the money, it becomes yours, you see it go out, and you see exactly what it costs to fund government.
 
I've posted many times about the need for "Net Zero" regarding income taxes. There is ZERO reason the rest of us should be sending people net money just because they filed their tax papers.
 
It pisses me off. My cousin has a big fanny, so that means she already had a kid shortly after turning 20, and gets paid maybe a little more than minimum wage, goes to community college, gets WIC, and has her grandmother take care of her daughter half the time.

Then she doesn't pay taxes, but rather she takes out. It's kind of like when she came to my parent's house every summer, ate all the food, spills soap and water everywhere, and breaks shit, then justifies it all by saying if I came to her grandmother's house, I could have whatever I want.

Same thing goes for people who work for the Federal Government. They say they pay taxes, but they're really just giving back the money that they took when they pay taxes.
 
Can't wait until this number gets up to 51%. Then the people who pay nothing will have the ability to make sure it stays that way.
 
I think I'm going to print this thread out and send it in with the large check I'll be mailing on Thursday night. Obviously, it will do no good, BUT might make me feel slightly better (or much worse). 🙁
 
Apple Of Sodom said:
According to CNN Money (http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/30/pf/taxes/who_pays_taxes/index.html)

"When considering federal income taxes in combination with payroll taxes, the percent of households with a net liability of zero or less is estimated to be 24% this year, according to the Tax Policy Center's estimates."
Click to expand...

This is much more a statement about how the the middle class is increasingly falling into poverty than about how more and more people are getting a free ride. Believe me, you don't want to be in that 24%.
 
Apple Of Sodom said:
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=529854

Good read. Basically the author states that 47% of U.S. households pay no federal income tax and that the top 10% of taxpayers provide 75% of tax revenue.
Click to expand...

To be fair, the top 10% also have 75% of the government representation. Government bailouts, subsidies, laws that favor their business. Do you remember why marijuana is illegal? Aside from the racism, it's a major competitor against cotton and nylon. Lobby against it - boom it's illegal overnight even when it natively grows in North America. This was about on the same level as making crab grass or house cats illegal but it still managed to pass because it had a lot of money pushing it.

Remember how basically all Americans want cheaper prescription drugs, but the government refuses to try to negotiate better prices like other countries do? You guessed it; lobbied (bribed) by drug companies.

Why did Obama drop the public option in favor of mandatory private insurance? Because he was bribed by the top 10%.
 
My feeling is that across the board, taxes are too low. If people were paying more out of their own pockets, they would be more involved in being angry about wasteful spending. As is, there is too much of a disconnect because it impacts only about half the country.

I also think that if we paid more taxes, people might be less inclined to support foreign wars/interventions, since they would actually need to be paid for, now borrowed for.

Anyway, it's complicated, and I'll probably just be labeled a tax and spend liberal for typing this post.
 
Carmen813 said:
My feeling is that across the board, taxes are too low. If people were paying more out of their own pockets, they would be more involved in being angry about wasteful spending. As is, there is too much of a disconnect because it impacts only about half the country.

I also think that if we paid more taxes, people might be less inclined to support foreign wars/interventions, since they would actually need to be paid for, now borrowed for.

Anyway, it's complicated, and I'll probably just be labeled a tax and spend liberal for typing this post.
Click to expand...
If we spent less... Oh, that's right - talking about cutting spending is so last century. Instead, let's talk about the merits of taking more of everyone's money at gunpoint - that'll learn those pesky taxpayers to complain!
 
I think we should have a minimum income tax rate.

Say 5% and no mater how poor you are or how little you make you still pay that 5%.

Now after welfare, WIC, Food stamps, public assistance etc etc etc you will still have people getting more than they are giving, but at least they are paying something.

Having to pay something will encourage more fiscal responsibility and hopefully make people understand that there is a real cost to all these 'free' things they are getting from the government.

Of course the liberals would never approve of such a thing.
 
Carmen813 said:
My feeling is that across the board, taxes are too low. If people were paying more out of their own pockets, they would be more involved in being angry about wasteful spending. As is, there is too much of a disconnect because it impacts only about half the country.

I also think that if we paid more taxes, people might be less inclined to support foreign wars/interventions, since they would actually need to be paid for, now borrowed for.

Anyway, it's complicated, and I'll probably just be labeled a tax and spend liberal for typing this post.
Click to expand...

Too low across the board? I gave about $70,000 to the government last year... I don't think that is too low, especially since I routinley work 10-14 hour days to make a good living. To be sure, I don't mind paying my fair share. I am also fortunate (smart, white male born to middle class family) and did something with myself, so I don't mind paying a bit more than those who were not born with a good hand...

But why should I pay more when ~50% of the U.S. pays nothing?

A short time ago my borough was trying to institute a plastic bag tax. 5 cents per plastic bag at the supermarket. Of course this would only add about 20 cents to your average $50 grocery bill...and people were PISSED! They started buying their own bags, and they wanted to know where that money would be used (I believe it was going to be used for recycling programs and trash cleanup.) The point is, charging people a very small amount for something they got for free suddenly made them pay attention and want to know what the hell was going on.

Do you think that charging low income even a token amount, such as $50, would get their attention enough?
 
ShawnD1 said:
To be fair, the top 10% also have 75% of the government representation. Government bailouts, subsidies, laws that favor their business. Do you remember why marijuana is illegal? Aside from the racism, it's a major competitor against cotton and nylon. Lobby against it - boom it's illegal overnight even when it natively grows in North America. This was about on the same level as making crab grass or house cats illegal but it still managed to pass because it had a lot of money pushing it.

Remember how basically all Americans want cheaper prescription drugs, but the government refuses to try to negotiate better prices like other countries do? You guessed it; lobbied (bribed) by drug companies.

Why did Obama drop the public option in favor of mandatory private insurance? Because he was bribed by the top 10%.
Click to expand...

I'm in the top 10%... actually I'm in the top 1%...and I do not feel as though I am being represented by them. You may be nearly right though...maybe it is the top .1% that are being represented by lobbies...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top