It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by no time
51% americans don't pay taxes debunked?
From this article, which seems very decently presented, I gather there is a very small difference between the actual percentage of income going to taxes across the top 80%. However the top 20-40% have ALL of the ASSETS, and the bottom 60% have all the debt, so even this would be hard to consider fair.
Just to clear this up in case there's any misunderstanding, it's approximately true that 51% of Americans pay no federal income tax. However, conservatives routinely abbreviate this by claiming that 51% of Americans pay no taxes. This is the zombie lie. Conservatives get very upset when you call them on it, but that never makes them stop.
Originally posted by boncho
Not sure how people having more or less assets relates to fairness.
In reality, I work 60-70 hour weeks usually. Would it be fair to me if someone working half those hours were paid the same, had the same assets, etc.
Wealth Inequality and Class In 2004, the wealthiest 25% of US households owned 87% ($43.6 trillion) of the country’s wealth, while the bottom quartile held no net wealth at all. The middle 50% of the country held 13% or $6.5 trillion of the total household net wealth. The previous data are taken from analysis of the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF) which over samples wealthy households. This over sampling more accurately represents the true wealth distribution [since most of the wealth is concentrated at the top]. This data shows that the top 25% of American society holds on average a net wealth of $1,556,801 which is 33 times more than those of the lower middle class, or the 25th-50th percentile. In addition to unequal wealth distribution, it can be difficult for individuals in the lower income distributions to gain economic mobility which inhibits their ability to accumulate wealth. In 2006, children in the lowest 20% of the income distribution only had a 17% chance of making it to the upper 40% of the income distribution. In 2004, children in the lowest 20% of the wealth distribution had only a 7% chance to make it to the top wealth distribution. In other words, wealthy parents tend to produce wealthy children, and poor parents tend to produce poor children. The Panel Study of Income Dynamics shows how stratification is becoming worse and worse since 1984. The lowest percentile has become worse, and the highest percentile has become wealthier. The fifth percentile has dropped further into negative net worth, while the 90th percentile has gained over four hundred points within the last twenty one years. However, compared to most countries, upward wealth mobility in the U.S. remains quite high. For instance, the U.S. Income Mobility Study conducted by the Treasury Department found the following - The Treasury study examined a huge sample of 96,700 income tax returns from 1996 and 2005 for Americans over the age of 25. The study tracks what happened to these tax filers over this 10-year period. One of the notable, and reassuring, findings is that nearly 58% of filers who were in the poorest income group in 1996 had moved into a higher income category by 2005. Nearly 25% jumped into the middle or upper-middle income groups, and 5.3% made it all the way to the highest quintile. Of those in the second lowest income quintile, nearly 50% moved into the middle quintile or higher, and only 17% moved down. This is a stunning show of upward mobility, meaning that more than half of all lower-income Americans in 1996 had moved up the income scale in only 10 years. The income of those in the top 1% fell by 25.8%, on average, and the top 10% by 2.8%. 
something very big is wrong in this country that much we will all agree on however the cause are very arguementative
New money does not appear magically in equal percentages in all people's bank accounts or under their mattresses. Money spreads unevenly, and this process has varying effects on individuals, depending on whether they receive early or late access to the new money.This was one of Mises's original contributions to monetary theory, one that is ignored by all other schools of economic analysis.... Mises argued that the losses of the late-coming losers are the source of income for the early arrival winners....
...This indicates a fundamental aspect of Mises's monetary theory that is rarely mentioned: the expansion or contraction of money is a zero-sum game.... The economic benefits obtained by the early users of new money, even gold, are made at the expense of those who gain access to it after it has altered the array of prices.... www.lewrockwell.com...
Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring classes of mankind, none is so effectual as that which deludes them with paper money. It is the most perfect expedient ever invented for fertilizing the rich man’s fields by the sweat of the poor man’s brow. Ordinary tyranny, oppression, excessive taxation, these bear lightly on the happiness of the community compared with fraudulent currencies and the robberies committed by depreciated paper. [inflation cv] Our own history has recorded enough, and more than enough, of the demoralizing tendency, the injustice and intolerable oppression on the virtuous and well disposed, of a degraded paper currency, authorized by law, or in any way countenanced by Government. ~Nelson W. Aldrich, United States Senator, at a New York City dinner speech on October 15, 1913 IV Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science #1, at 38 (Columbia University, New York (1914)). [He was quoting Andrew Jackson. cv] www.linuxtoday.com...
Originally posted by Gmoneycricket
reply to post by no time
Could you also show us a graph of
Civilians killed in Foreign Countries
with American tax dollars during the same period?
Actually I was hoping we could all agree that the problem is the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, Fiat currency and the fact that the US dollar has lost 96% of its value thanks to the Feds "Printing press"
On top of that 1% of the population now controls over 90% of the wealth. (It use to be 20% controlled 80% - the Pareto Principle)