It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Tax Myths Mangled

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 06:50 PM
link   
There have been some real tax myth doozies posted at ATS and either some people haven't seen the facts, refuse to believe the facts, or are just straight up lying about the facts. In order for a real debate on tax policy to take place, we have to dispel the lies first.

1. Obama is planning the largest tax increase in history.
The plan is to let the Bush tax cuts for just the top bracket of tax payers to return to 1999 levels. That would mean an increase for the richest to pay 35% instead of the current 33%. As recently as August 1, Sarah Palin parroted this lie on Fox. And she got a flaming Pants On Fire rating from Politifact. This 2% increase is the origination of him being labeled a socialist.

2. Obama will raise everybody's taxes.
Obama said that 98% of Americans would NOT see a tax increase under his plan, and that's still the plan. As recently as this month an editorial in the Washington Examiner regurgitated this ruse. Obama's proposed FY 2011 budget states:
Budget eliminates the Bush tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 a year and devotes those resources instead to reducing the deficit. If you make under that, you're safe. Case closed.

3. An increase of taxes on the top 2% would hurt small business
This one was started by McCain in his July 7th speechduring the '08 campaign. It has been repeated all the way up to this month when Sen Orin Hatch called it a "job killing take hike". I looked at Factcheck.org and according to Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center the number of small business owners that make over $250,000 filing married or $200,000 filing single is 663,608 out of 26.8 million. That is roughly .25%, or one quarter of one percent. Is it safe to say it is NOT a job killing tax hike? Absolutely.

4. The bottom 50% need to pay their fair share of the taxes.
While it is true that the bottom 47% escaped paying any Federal income taxes this past year they still paid in on payroll taxes, state and local taxes, capital gains taxes, and so forth. They escaped paying Federal income taxes for one because they make such little income and because of a program created by Richard Nixon and expanded by both Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton, from an idea came from legendary conservative economist Milton Friedman, called the Earned Income Tax Credit.
In 2009 the top 1% of Americans owned 33.8% of the wealth while the bottom 50% held 2.5%. So ask yourself this, would taxing that 2.5% really put a dent in tax revenues? Be honest.
The bottom 50% have less money and still pay a higher percentage of it in taxes than the rich do. According to a report by Citizens for Tax Justice, "Claims that the richest one percent are paying far more than their fair share usually focus only on one type of federal tax paid (the federal income tax) while ignoring other regressive federal
taxes, like the payroll tax, which is more significant for most taxpayers. They also ignore state and local taxes, which tend to tax low- and middle-income families more heavily than well-off families. As these figures make clear, the richest Americans are not being “overtaxed” relative to other Americans or relative to their share of national income."
The top 1% pays 30.9% of their income in taxes.
The next 4% pays 32.1%
the next 5% pays 32.2%
the next 10% pays 31.5%
the next 20% pays 30%
the next 20% pays 27%
the next 20% pays 22.3%
and the poorest of the poor with an income of $12,000 or less pays 18.7%.
All pretty even until you get to the poorest. Anyone who says they should pay 30% as well should try living on $12,000 a year and see why they shouldn't.

5. Tax cuts for the wealthy creates jobs.
Unfortunately for liars, numerical facts exist. Since "trickle Down Economics was conceived in the early eighties, private sector job growth was at 31%. In 2001 the private sectors were creating only 23% of the jobs, by 2009, it's at 1.1%. But wait, I thought rich people create jobs. No, they don't. They took their tax breaks and kept all the money, all while saving a few more bucks by shipping American jobs overseas.

Now that you are "in the know' as far as taxes and the Bush tax cuts are concerned, we can all have logical debate on this subject. For those who catch a poster typing one of these tax tales, refer them here.

Down below I posted a chart showing the lopsided Republican tax plan and how it definitely benefits the rich the most. If you make one million dollars you will save more than the bottom 50% make ALL YEAR!!!

[edit on 16-8-2010 by 12GaugePermissionSlip]




posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 07:23 PM
link   
And here is Democrat vs Republican tax plans and the savings for each



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 07:36 PM
link   
Very good post! This is truly kind of funny, as I began a Word document the other day on this very subject, then gave it up, as I really didn't feel like doing the research. One thing I've noticed is that certain politicians have learned that if you repeat a lie long enough, an ever-expanding portion of the population will believe you. Great job, sir!



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 08:02 PM
link   
Yeah i remember that Myth Obama started circulating about how anyone earning less than 250,000 dollars a year would see no form of Tax increase. No, wait, im confused, was that just a complete lie?



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Johnze
 


You are confused.
Read #2 again real slow.



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by 12GaugePermissionSlip
 






Obama said that 98% of Americans would NOT see a tax increase under his plan, and that's still the plan. As recently as this month an editorial in the Washington Examiner regurgitated this ruse. Obama's proposed FY 2011 budget states: Budget eliminates the Bush tax cuts for those making more than $250,000 a year and devotes those resources instead to reducing the deficit. If you make under that, you're safe. Case closed.


Im sorry, i read this again and again, as slow as i could manage, and i still dont seem to understand. Perhaps you could explain.

Obama states that 98% of Americans would not see a tax increase under his plan. Yes?, or am i mistaken.

If he proposes to abandon the pland tax breaks for those earning over 250,00 dollars a year. This still implies that those earning over 250,000 will still see a form of tax increase yes?

So from what i understand, this is saying that 98% of Americans earn under 250,000 dollars a year.

Is that true?, Ive not actualy checkd, however thats quite a frightning disparity in wealth.

Back to my point though, so your telling me, that when Obama openly said, that no family earning under 250,000 will see any form of tax increase?. Are you sure thats true?, 100 percent positive are you?, he stuck to this pledge did he?

[edit on 16-8-2010 by Johnze]



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 08:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Johnze
 





Obama states that 98% of Americans would not see a tax increase under his plan. Yes?

Yes




so your telling me, that when Obama openly said, that no family earning under 250,000 will see any form of tax increase?.

Correct.



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 08:46 PM
link   
reply to post by 12GaugePermissionSlip
 


So, take say the added tax increase on products such as tobaco, or pharmaceuticals. Do those not count?

Ive also seen many, many new taxes being introduced through the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010. Does any of that not count as tax increase?, seeing as how they basicaly are a kind of tax increase.

[edit on 16-8-2010 by Johnze]



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 08:49 PM
link   
nevermind, Johnze beat me to it.

[edit on 8/16/2010 by abecedarian]



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 08:52 PM
link   
i can put this thread to rest once and for all


hey all you rich people
hey all you rich corporations
hey all you rich banks

leave now......


ok they are leaving.

now whose gonna give you a job? the government?
now whose gonna give you those loans so you can buy a house,car,etc
now where you going to get your ipods,xbox,ps3s,etc.
now where you gonna buy your internet service,etc
where you gonna buy your clothes since theres noone to make them and noone to sell them to you and noone to give the the loans to buy eqipment etc.


you see how that works?


you wanna know the biggest difference between the rich and you- they dont expect anyone to give them a handout.

and as such rich,corporations,and banks are all in it for the money that is why they exist

they dont get rich giving things away for free.

this is why our government is so screwed up

and those people are doing everything right

with all the bs that businesses and finance have to deal with such as unions,regualtions, and taxes.

well taxes are the easiest thing to deal with out of all of them.

so thats why most get breaks.

i will fight to my last breath for rich,banks,and corporations because the alternative is worse than death itself. the us federal governement would be the only game in town.

[edit on 16-8-2010 by neo96]



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


You do understand that if the level of fraud and corruption perpetrated by Wall Street on the world economy happend in China, there would more than likely be mass executions of high level government officials for basicaly allowing it to happen yes?. Instead, in America and Europe, it is encouraged and receives full government backing.

No one is asking, rich people, corporations and banks to leave or the total abandonment of our current economic system, but instead asking for serious reform and regulation of those markets that essentialy create economic collapses.

Im also pretty sure the OP was wanting to have a debate of sorts, not random demagogue slogan posts.



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 09:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Johnze
 


the level of fraud and corruption in the us government is a heck of alot worse.

come on why are the rich and banking and corporations so constantly vilified then?

its all about the wealth destruction so the only thing is left is the government


[edit on 16-8-2010 by neo96]



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
...

its all about the wealth destruction so the only thing is left is the government

...


So taxes are going up? How else to affect that outcome?



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 





the level of fraud and corruption in the us government is a heck of alot worse.


Well yes, thats my point.



come on why are the rich and banking and corporations so constantly vilified then?


Ummmm I think you answered that when you mentiond levels of corruption within the U.S, i thinks its pretty obvious why the banking sectors have been vilified as of late.



its all about the wealth destruction so the only thing is left is the government


Considering most government are effectively in the pockets of the largest corporations, and the corporations themselves including the banking sector are recording record proffits and awarding record bonuses at a time of total financial collapse for the rest of the people Im not really sure what you are suggesting is true. The rich are apparently getting richer.

AND PLEASE NOTE

this is wildly off topic from the OP, unless you perhaps want to tie in how Obama is basicaly trying to save the economy by doing everything he can for big busines.

[edit on 16-8-2010 by Johnze]

[edit on 16-8-2010 by Johnze]



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 09:21 PM
link   
reply to post by abecedarian
 


are you serious with question?

taxes go up where does that money go? the government

has the government shown any intelligence whatsoever when it comes to tax payer dime.

given the current admin its more than likely going to bail out unions or entitlements.

i ask you why? why in heck would you give them anymore money than necessary when they have shown time and time agian the massive irresponsibilty of the powers that be.


the outcome is you being broken without an end in site

[edit on 16-8-2010 by neo96]



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Johnze
 


like i said how can you blame then for doing everything right.


rich do everything smarter to stay rich and that is no easy task.


as we all know we never know what tomorrow brings.

case in point stock market fall to 6000 points.


the better you planned the better you can wether the storm..


so in my opinion there is never a point when you have too much



[edit on 16-8-2010 by neo96]



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Well thats a bit of a moral debate really. Your right, they are infact doing something right as it is obviously creating more wealth allowing them to have a more fruitful life. Hats off to them, thats what we all try and acheive.

HOWEVER

It is when those actions then begin to have a negative affect on the society you happen to be in as a whole do you have to question how viable these endevours are. If what i am doing for myself is great, but bad for so many others, am i not therefor obliged to stop what am doing for the benefit of the many?



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 09:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Johnze
 


the us government is having a more negative effect on society than wall street will ever have.


the us government will always be the biggest enemy to we the people that wall street will ever be.



ponder this for hundreds of years its been due to wall street that you and me and all of us have had the lives we have.


without wall street this country would have been a third world nation.


and it is our current government driving at mach 25 right off the edge into poverty.



im pretty sure were not gonna see eye to eye on this one.....


but ask yourself where would we be without the wealth of wallstreet and rich?



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 09:39 PM
link   
Tax Myths Mangled, I'd say so,,,, This is what I've discovered.
Go to www.nytimes.com...
and read : Study Looks at Tax Cut Lapse for Rich

I just don't see a tax break coming. I don't care how you look at it, I believe you're going to pay more and I'm paying more now.

Snippet: If the president gets his way, in 2011 the top two income tax rates — now 33 percent and 35 percent — would revert to the levels before the Bush administration, 36 percent and 39.6 percent, respectively. But the four lower rates would remain 10 percent, 15 percent, 25 percent and 28 percent. For some taxpayers earning up to $250,000, the top marginal rate would remain 33 percent.

Given the progressive nature of the federal income tax system, in which tax rates increase with income, even the richest households would continue to pay the four lower rates on up to the first $250,000 of their income, under the approach being pushed by Mr. Obama and Democratic leaders in Congress.

And where is your tax break?



posted on Aug, 16 2010 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Johnze
reply to post by neo96
 


You do understand that if the level of fraud and corruption perpetrated by Wall Street on the world economy happend in China, there would more than likely be mass executions of high level government officials for basicaly allowing it to happen yes?.


Interesting point. It's worth noting that Capitalism cannot function if fraud is allowed into the system.




top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join