Who says the rich don't pay enough taxes?

[Riprorin]

The Dems of course.

President Bush reported $811, 100 in adjusted gross income for last year and paid $250, 202 in federal income taxes. Ouch!

By contrast, I paid about 12.5%.

 

[Hanpan]

Heh. In canada he would have paid about $450,000

That is of course if he hadn't used one of the many legal loopholes up here...

 

[Amused]

<< The Dems of course.

President Bush reported $811, 100 in adjusted gross income for last year and paid $250, 202 in federal income taxes. Ouch!

By contrast, I paid about 12.5%. >>



Holy cow! That's more than 30%! But how can that be? Carbony tells us that the rich pay less than 5%!

(Sorry, Carbony, I HAD to 😉 )

 

[BlueApple]

<< The Dems of course. >>


Uhh.... which ones are you referring to? Or do you like to just group over 100 million people to what a few congressmen said?

I am a 'democrat' and I think the 'rich' (loosely defined word) pay more then enough in taxes

Now, off to read 'Blinded by the Right', while the rest of ATOT goes to read 'Bias' 😉

 

[Riprorin]

Are you serious? You should watch a few more political debates.

The Dems playing the poor against the rich is classic stuff.

 

[Amused]

<<

<< The Dems of course. >>


Uhh.... which ones are you referring to? Or do you like to just group over 100 million people to what a few congressmen said?

I am a 'democrat' and I think the 'rich' (loosely defined word) pay more then enough in taxes >>



Blue, you know full well that far more than "a few congessmen" have this POV. In fact, I've argued with quite a few of them on this very board. Those "congressmen" wouldn't be selling this class envy BS if no one was buying, and you know it.

 

[PowerEngineer]

<< President Bush reported $811, 100 in adjusted gross income for last year and paid $250, 202 in federal income taxes. >>



Given that Presidents know their tax returns will be made public, it's not really surprising that they pay relatively high taxes. Now if we could take a look at returns for some of his richest supporter (including "Kenny Boy" Lay and his Enron cronies), I bet we'd see something a lot different.

 

[Ornery]

"Ouch!"

I hear that! :frown:

 

[Amused]

<<

<< President Bush reported $811, 100 in adjusted gross income for last year and paid $250, 202 in federal income taxes. >>



Given that Presidents know their tax returns will be made public, it's not really surprising that they pay relatively high taxes. Now if we could take a look at returns for some of his richest supporter (including "Kenny Boy" Lay and his Enron cronies), I bet we'd see something a lot different. >>



For all this whining that the rich don't pay enough, no one can dismiss the fact that they pay the majority of taxes as it is. The top 5% of earners pay more than half the taxes. How is that if they are getting away without paying 'their fair share?'

Drop the BS. The facts don't support it.

 

[Ferocious]

<< Given that Presidents know their tax returns will be made public, it's not really surprising that they pay relatively high taxes. Now if we could take a look at returns for some of his richest supporter (including "Kenny Boy" Lay and his Enron cronies), I bet we'd see something a lot different. >>


You got that right!

Democrats arguing against the Republicans desire to give the rich more tax breaks......is somehow considered a desire for tax increases by most goose-steppers.

 

[Riprorin]

From Ornery's link:

"Don't let anyone tell you that the rich are somehow escaping. The wealthiest 1 percent now pay more than a third of all the taxes. This far outstrips their 19-percent portion of taxable income. Meanwhile, taxpayers in the bottom half pay only 4 percent of the taxes. Because the rich make a large contribution to productivity and investment, everyone suffers from this game of redistribution."

 

[Amused]

<<

<< Given that Presidents know their tax returns will be made public, it's not really surprising that they pay relatively high taxes. Now if we could take a look at returns for some of his richest supporter (including "Kenny Boy" Lay and his Enron cronies), I bet we'd see something a lot different. >>


You got that right!

Democrats arguing against the Republicans desire to give the rich more tax breaks......is somehow considered a desire for tax increases by most goose-steppers.

>>



More nonsense from the extreme left.

Again, how is it "fair" that only 5% of the nation pays 55% of the tax burden? A burden that has risen 10+% in the last 11 years, BTW. And please show me a time when the left has argued AGAINST a tax increase for the upper 50%?

Oops, you can't.

 

[BlueApple]

<< Blue, you know full well that far more than "a few congessmen" have this POV. In fact, I've argued with quite a few of them on this very board. Those "congressmen" wouldn't be selling this class envy BS if no one was buying, and you know it. >>



I'm a stupid left-wing tool, what are you talking about? 😉

It may just be the people that I talk to then, since many of them think that the rich aren't paying enough. I guess I know too many 'rich' dems. 😕

 

[Amused]

😕 Indeed.

 

[Riprorin]

If they feel they're not paying enough taxes I'm sure that there are a lot of charitable groups that would like their money.

Don't use your guilt to take money out of my pocket.

 

[ViRGE]

AmusedOne, you wouldn't happen to have any statistics on how much money the top 5% have out of the entire US money pool(say xx%), would you?

 

[Zebo]

<< The Dems of course.

President Bush reported $811, 100 in adjusted gross income for last year and paid $250, 202 in federal income taxes. Ouch!

By contrast, I paid about 12.5%. >>



OH you guys really believe someone who owned a 500M baseball team only made 800K this year... LOLOLOL

That what his reported income is. He made tons from offshore investment accounts never too be reported..Totally exempt!

 

[Lucky]

<<

<< President Bush reported $811, 100 in adjusted gross income for last year and paid $250, 202 in federal income taxes. >>



Given that Presidents know their tax returns will be made public, it's not really surprising that they pay relatively high taxes. Now if we could take a look at returns for some of his richest supporter (including "Kenny Boy" Lay and his Enron cronies), I bet we'd see something a lot different. >>




I dont know about "Kenny Boy", but my father will pay about twice that in taxes this year, despite being a CPA. He's moving to texas though, which should save him ~30K because of the lack of income tax. The rich do indeed get raped up the ass on taxes. Nearly 50% in my fathers case, with all taxes considered.

 

[SuperTool]

I sent a new Maxima worth of taxes to the government this year 🙁
And they came back and grabbed a new stereo system worth on top of that. I have to pay $800 on monday.
And as a single guy with no kids, I get no benefit from the state or the feds. And don't start telling me about the roads. The roads in CA suck 🙁 I hate you guys with kids forcing me to pay for your responsibilities.

 

[PowerEngineer]

<< "Don't let anyone tell you that the rich are somehow escaping. The wealthiest 1 percent now pay more than a third of all the taxes. This far outstrips their 19-percent portion of taxable income. Meanwhile, taxpayers in the bottom half pay only 4 percent of the taxes. Because the rich make a large contribution to productivity and investment, everyone suffers from this game of redistribution." >>



Okay...so the wealthiest 1% of Americans have 1900% of the average taxable income (I wonder how much non-taxable income there might be?) and they are expected to pay roughly 50% (.30/.19) more than the average tax rate. Sorry, but I'm having trouble working up the tears here.

What's more interesting is how these numbers highlight the income disparity between the rich and the poor in this country. Don't get me wrong -- I'm all for unfettered capitalism and individual work and accomplishment. That said, it would be better for us as a country if the results put everyone closer to the average.



<< And please show me a time when the left has argued AGAINST a tax increase for the upper 50%? >>



Answer: probably at the same time that the RIGHT has argued FOR a tax increase for the upper 50% 🙂

And, Supertool, you might as well complain to your own parents about how they've forced some of the cost of your upbringing on the rest of the country too. 😱

 

[Ornery]

"...it would be better for us as a country if the results put everyone closer to the average."

Unfettered capitalism with a healthy dose of wealth redistribution? Uh, who the hell is going to start (or invest in) a business knowing people like you are going to grab the lion's share of profits?

 

[Zebo]

First off I think it's important to establish "WHAT IS RICH". IMO rich is not having income like a NBA players 17M a year becasue it's fully taxable as income so sorry no real breaks for him. Yes he's very wealthy but not rich. Rich is the guy who has his money though investments and/or inheritance and watches that money grow though other investments. He has a phalyx of accountants to find the loop-holes in the tax law and work them so his profits are not taxed like us "income" workers and investors. The middle and upper middle class do pay most of the taxes and thats a sad state. But not as sad as the super rich paying little to nothing...

Here is a REAL example how they escape paying what we do.

K.C. STAR, 4/18/97. "More rich pay no tax, IRS says";

"Many receive exempt interest from municipal bonds, records show" "Nearly 2,400 of the Americans with the highest incomes paid no federal income taxes in 1993, up from just 85 individuals and couples in 1977, the latest available information from the Internal Revenue Service shows. While the number of Americans who make $200,000 or more grew more than 15-fold from 1977 to 1993, the number of people in that income category who paid no income taxes grew 28-fold, or nearly twice as fast, according to a quarterly statistical bulletin issued by the IRS. The report also shows that 18,000 Americans with high incomes paid less than 5 percent of their income in taxes. And it cast doubt on the effectiveness of the Alternative Minimum Tax, which was designed to ensure that the wealthy paid at least some income taxes.

"Tax lawyers and other tax experts said on Thursday that the number of Americans with incomes of more than $300,000 who pay little or no income taxes had certainly grown since 1993. - On one-fourth of the returns, a combination of interest deductions and taxes paid to states and local governments was the most frequent reason for eliminating federal income taxes, the information shows. Income taxes paid to foreign governments, which generally are offset dollar for dollar against U.S. income taxes, were the primary reason no taxes were due in about one-fifth of the cases. - Release of the latest IRS Statistics of Income Bulletin follows by days the posting on the Internet of IRS information showing that in the last decade the IRS has significantly reduced its audits on the highest-income Americans while increasing audits of the poorest. - The number of high-income Americans who pay little or no taxes will continue to rise, the experts said, in part because in 1993 Congress gave a tax break to landlords, allowing unlimited deductions for depreciation and other accounting losses."

 

[Zebo]

<< "...it would be better for us as a country if the results put everyone closer to the average."

Unfettered capitalism with a healthy dose of wealth redistribution? Uh, who the hell is going to start (or invest in) a business knowing people like you are going to grab the lion's share of profits? >>



Ah trickle down. Problem is it did'nt work. Over the last 20 years The top 1% wealth increased by 4000% while the middle class has remained stagnent relative to inflation.. LINK? I has bookmarked but lost it from the IRS website...

European democratic socialism works

 

[PowerEngineer]

<< "...it would be better for us as a country if the results put everyone closer to the average."

Unfettered capitalism with a healthy dose of wealth redistribution? Uh, who the hell is going to start (or invest in) a business knowing people like you are going to grab the lion's share of profits? >>



Ornery, I do like my selection of words better than the ones you have chosen for me. 😉 I didn't say anything about wealth redistribution. Read again what I did say.

Consider any sports league of several competing teams. Obviously you want all the teams to play as well as they can and to compete under the same rules. That said, the players will have more fun if all games are pretty competative and every team has a real chance to win. If one team is so much better that it crushes every other team every time, then that's not as good. It would be better for the league if the results were closer.

 

[Ornery]

Ah Socialism/Communism! Problem is it did'nt work!

The countries on this planet that keep on pursuing that type of government have economies in the toilet or worse. What has our economy done over the last twenty years, Sport?

Edit:

"It would be better for the league if the results were closer."

You're on PowerEngineer, how do you go about doing this?