Obama caving in on Bush tax cuts for Top2%?

[Darwin333]

That's not what the data shows...

http://www.ctj.org/corporatetaxdodgers/CorporateTaxDodgersReport.pdf

Yet the combined .gov revenue is very near, as a percentage of GDP, the historic highs. I think its been higher 2 or 3 years, so how much do you think the combined .gov revenue, as a percentage of GDP, should be? 40% of GDP? 50%? 75%? Whats your personal limit on how much of Americas gross domestic product should be taxed and spent by the .gov?

 

[Jhhnn]

So people who aren't in the upper class are "truly wealthy"???

You misunderstand. Read it again. I argued that the wealthy have a huge advantage because their incomes are derived from investments, typically taxed at 15%, while those in the top 2% but below the top .1% mostly receive earned income, pay much higher marginal rates. A guy earning $500K in salary & bonus often pays a higher tax rate than a guy making $5M from investments.

There is no progressivity in the top 1% taxes. There is, in truth, regressivity, with guys like Mitt paying 15-18%, while people making $350K often pay ~24%.

Take away the deductions the $350K earner gets, and he'll pay even more. Take away the same deductions from those at the tippy top, and their tax rates will barely budge.

http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-individual-income-tax-data-0

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=260

 

[Throckmorton]

You can read minds? So when the Republicans talk about closing loopholes and reforming the tax code. They are really saying they want to lower taxes. I think you need to reform your republican to insane left translator. It clearly isnt translating well for you.

Were you not paying attention during the campaign?

 

[Jhhnn]

Why is eliminating loopholes and deductions on the rich a joke? If Obama truely said that and democrats are open to it bravo to them.

Because there's a lot more to it than you think.

Let's say that I'm a rising entrepreneur in a very successful small business paying myself $1M/yr, or an executive making the same amount as earned income.

Let's say you are an investor making the same amount from LTCG's, dividends, interest & carried interest.

Let's say our circumstances are identical, say "single" from this chart or any other you might choose. Both of us whittle our taxable income down to the same amount.

http://taxes.about.com/od/Federal-Income-Taxes/qt/Tax-Rates-For-The-2012-Tax-Year.htm

You pay a flat 15%, and I pay a helluva lot more. Even if we both lose the same deductions, I pay more, unless your rate is increased.

It's arithmetic.

Here's a more in depth look at it all-

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/20/b....html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121120

The effect is even greater at astronomical income levels, where deductions fade in relationship to investment derived income like Mitt's. Dependents & child tax credits become insignificant, as do a lot of interest deductions, even medical deductions outside of a very expensive health crisis.

 

[nehalem256]

You misunderstand. Read it again. I argued that the wealthy have a huge advantage because their incomes are derived from investments, typically taxed at 15%, while those in the top 2% but below the top .1% mostly receive earned income, pay much higher marginal rates. A guy earning $500K in salary & bonus often pays a higher tax rate than a guy making $5M from investments.

There is no progressivity in the top 1% taxes. There is, in truth, regressivity, with guys like Mitt paying 15-18%, while people making $350K often pay ~24%.

Take away the deductions the $350K earner gets, and he'll pay even more. Take away the same deductions from those at the tippy top, and their tax rates will barely budge.

http://taxfoundation.org/article/summary-latest-federal-individual-income-tax-data-0

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=260

So once again you fail to understand the difference between capital gains (of which 40-50% of average "gain" isn't a real gain) and earned income.

 

[irishScott]

Yep. It's been a notable Irony that Democrats are now considering what amounts to Romney's plan as a compromise solution.

 

[Jhhnn]

So once again you fail to understand the difference between capital gains (of which 40-50% of average "gain" isn't a real gain) and earned income.

Hogwash. Income is income, regardless of the source.