CBO:Top 40% Paid 106.2% of Income Taxes; Bottom 40% Paid -9.1%

reply to post by burdman30ott6

Let's test your reading comprehension since you seem to have already graded my own. Where in this thread do I call anyone a 'useless eater?'

My mistake those words were someone else's.

But your basic error remains. Overwhelmingly, the transfer payments mentioned in your OP article are actually going to Social Security and Medicare, not to freeloaders.

Here are your own words...

...he lost the election largely because of the 40% of Americans who wouldn't vote against their Meal Ticket. (Well, in actuality those of us who sit in the "Top" 40% are their Meal Ticket...

...I'm angry because I am forced to budget my family tightly to afford to pay for a bunch of other folks' tax payer subsidized leeching lifestyle...

...THEY need to take responsibility for themselves, their education, and their employment situation...

All a bunch of BS. Social Security are earned from a lifetime of contributing to a system that stabilizes the lives of millions of Americans every day. Those are the people you were complaining about all along, if you had bothered to read the article with more than passing attention!

DrEugeneFixer
Social Security are earned from a lifetime of contributing to a system that stabilizes the lives of millions of Americans every day. Those are the people you were complaining about all along, if you had bothered to read the article with more than passing attention!

Couple issues, actually.
1. For an accurate representation it would be very necessary to see what the average pay into SS & Medicare for the lower 40% was through the course of their working lives. It still is pretty likely that the payout to them does not balance out from whatever they paid in.

2. Completely subtracting the SS & Medicare transfers from the picture, we see that lower 40% recieving 69.8% of the "Other Transfers" for $8,500 lowest 20% and $4,900 for the second lowest 20%. Meanwhile, the lowest 20% paid between $0 and $50 in federal income taxes and the next lowest paid $2,500.


Look at Box 1 on Page 7
www.cbo.gov...

Now another issue from that table (which again centers more on the ridiculousness of the system than on the earners) is found in the nature of Social Security and personal income levels. Look at Table 3 on Page 13...
See the Social Insurance Taxes column? Notice how that percentage soars the higher up the earnings ladder you get? The two top quintiles are paying 69% of the take for Social Security and Medicare.

40% are using 70% of the money while another 40% are paying 70% of the money. Spin things however you wish, the facts show the disproportionality of the system in which the top 40% are effectively subsidizing the bottom 40%.

The middle class has to pay for giant wasteful programs like this thing: www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by burdman30ott6


Well now we're having an entirely different discussion. Before you were calling social security and medicare recipients irresponsible leaches, now you're just claiming that maybe some of them don't pay enough into the system to justify their benefits. Well, maybe, but you didn't give any evidence for that.

Somehow, you think it's unjust that the richest people in the history of the world shoulder more of the federal tax burden than the poorest people in America. To be frank that's just ridiculous. You can't get blood from a stone. High Income, High Wealth individuals are the biggest beneficiaries of our system of law and government; It's only fair that they shoulder more of the burden.

DrEugeneFixer
Somehow, you think it's unjust that the richest people in the history of the world shoulder more of the federal tax burden than the poorest people in America. To be frank that's just ridiculous. You can't get blood from a stone. High Income, High Wealth individuals are the biggest beneficiaries of our system of law and government; It's only fair that they shoulder more of the burden.

I'm not talking about the 1% here!!! My God, this is the problem. When the whole "We are the 99%" thing started, a lot of people predicted exactly this. They were poo-pooed when they said "Hey, watch this gradually move down the ladder until it goes from everybody against the wealthiest 1% to the poor and lower middle class against the middle calss and up." That is exactly where you're at right now. I AM NOT FINANCIALLY RICH! I'm in the 40% that's paying for everything, but dude, there's a distinct lack of perspective when somebody sitting in the working middle class is considered "rich" and expected to pay for others.

reply to post by burdman30ott6


I feel your pain and I refuse to work because that means more taxes leached out of my husband check to keep paying the welfare growing state specially in my neck of the woods, we fall in the bracket that what I will make working will be gone on taxes, just like my husband entire retirement pay from the military goes to pay taxes and more, because he have a full time job.

But as long as the government and the corporate dictatorship has somebody to leach they don't give two rats arses who they gouge to keep feeding their voting base in the welfare group, now you know who are the ones that the ACA will be gouging.

reply to post by burdman30ott6

I AM NOT FINANCIALLY RICH! I'm in the 40% that's paying for everything, but dude, there's a distinct lack of perspective when somebody sitting in the working middle class is considered "rich" and expected to pay for others.

I could care less about your personal situation, but, since you brought it up: you're making $60,000 plus each year. Most americans make significantly less than that. In fact you make 3 times what 20 percent of households make. If you're not accumulating financial wealth at that income, you are making poor choices.

if you're one of the top 40% of income earners in the US today, that makes you one of the richest people who have ever walked this earth. Put that in perspective for a moment. Somehow you feel that you're the victim in this situation, even though by any realistic standard, you're very well off, both historically, and compard to your contemporaries. I bet you have a pretty nice home with no leaks in the roof thats warm in winter and cool in summer. I bet you don't have much of a chance of being seriously injured at work. I bet you have a dependable car in the driveway, that hardly ever breaks down, if not two or three. I bet you can afford to eat as much food as you want to pretty much all the time. It seems to me like you're exactly the sort of person who ought to be making a contribution to the common good through income taxes: you can afford it.

We get it, you want more stuff for yourself. If you don't want to contribute or pay taxes, go live in the woods.

marg6043
we fall in the bracket that what I will make working will be gone on taxes

That is clearly bull#. There is no bracket that has a tax rate of 100%.

DrEugeneFixer

marg6043
we fall in the bracket that what I will make working will be gone on taxes

That is clearly bull#. There is no bracket that has a tax rate of 100%.

That one went right over your head !!

Re-read marg's post again.

What she says is actually correct and very real for many people.

Same situation goes with people collecting Social Security and working at the same time.

Not uncommon at all. And certainly not BULLitis.

reply to post by DrEugeneFixer


You are acting like people in the so called middle class are some kind of common criminals.

Silly.

People who pay the majority of taxes are already supporting the 'poor'.

Why should everybody go broke to support the government bureaucratic graft and corruption ?

It's almost like some people are jealous or something.

What do you think is going to happen when the middle class simply gives up ?

Then who will ultimately pay the freight ?

xuenchen

Re-read marg's post again.

What she says is actually correct and very real for many people.

Same situation goes with people collecting Social Security and working at the same time.

Not uncommon at all. And certainly not BULLitis.

No, it's just bull# made up by ignorant people who don't understand how taxes work, but love to complain about them. Show me one example of a tax bracket or situation that actually works out this way.

xuenchenYou are acting like people in the so called middle class are some kind of common criminals.

No, I just expect them to be contributing members of society and pay their taxes like they already do.

xuenchenWhat do you think is going to happen when the middle class simply gives up ?

I don't expect the middle class to 'give up'. But if some of them want to drop out of society and stop earning income that can be taxed, someone else will just move up and take their jobs and pay their taxes. That's fine with me.

reply to post by beezzer

Are you really that surprised? Wealth redistribution, social justice, punishing success, is all the mainstay of this administration.

i used to think that, but then i thought more.

"is a man/woman not entitled to the sweat of his/her brow?" yes, but what if their labors are criminal?

i'm not advocating for higher taxes on the rich; more getting rid of money all together. capitalism is a system built on greed. people think that's perfect because humans are greedy, but what they didn't consider is that they're most likely gonna get screwed over.

I dont see the problem with what is described in the op.
It's the job of government to redistribute wealth.
You should be pissed that the government prefers to chase you rather than corporations.
Here in the UK the government does the same.
We get Working Tax Credits here, it's basically a subsidy the goevernment gives low income workers, in a deal they've made so big business doesnt have to pay a living wage.

reply to post by DrEugeneFixer


Your posts are hard to respond to because of your cherry picking and tangents.

But as far as taxes and SS are concerned:

How much can I earn while receiving Social Security retirement benefits?

The amount you can earn while receiving Social Security depends on your age. Your earnings in (and after) the month you reach full retirement age will not affect your Social Security benefits. However, your benefit is reduced if your earnings exceed certain limits for the months before you reach your full retirement age.

If you are under full retirement age for the entire year:

You can earn $15,120 gross wages or net self-employment a year and not lose any benefits in 2013.
We will deduct $1 in benefits for every $2 earned above $15,120.

In the year you reach full retirement age:

You can earn $40,080 gross wages or net self-employment prior to the month you reach full retirement age and not lose any benefits in 2013.
We will deduct $1 in benefits for every $3 earned above $40,080.

The same earnings limits apply to a spouse or child who works and receives benefits on your record. You should report earnings to us for any months and years prior to full retirement age.

 

How work affects Social Security retirement payments

 

As for the rest of your rantings and peevings...
Thanks for confirming the jealousy.
Jealousy usually indicates failure.

DrEugeneFixer
No, I just expect them to be contributing members of society and pay their taxes like they already do.

The middle class is already punching well above their weight as 'contributors to society'...they need less strain, not more, and not even status quo.

DrEugeneFixer
No, it's just bull# made up by ignorant people who don't understand how taxes work, but love to complain about them. Show me one example of a tax bracket or situation that actually works out this way.

If you're purely looking at income taxes, you're right.... but wait, this current government has plenty of auxiliary taxes (and hand outs/"transfers") which are based on household income and thresholds at which each takes over or expires. It is very possible in 2013 America for an additional $1 in income for a year to equal thousands of dollars in additional tax liability as well as the loss of no-longer eligible tax breaks, subsidies, and credits.

Your response to me I read as the following:

greedy greedy greedy
gimme gimme gimme
jealous jealous jealous

Seriously, in 2013 the greed of people who feel entitled to the wealth of others and support redistributive taxation is pretty sickening.

DrEugeneFixer
if you're one of the top 40% of income earners in the US today, that makes you one of the richest people who have ever walked this earth.

...so goddamned rich we middle class are able to also ensure that the American poor are among the richest people to walk the Earth, at least when compared to the third world half of Earth...

By the way, I rent a house and own one rig (a 20 year old SUV). I went to college so I could easily purchase a house, land, and drive a nice truck. I could do all of these things on my base salary, but it's not realistic when I'm watching it fly out the window to numerous taxes, inflation, regulatory costs, and various other hidden costs intended to subsidize the have nots. What your scenario ignores is a simple fact: Man is entitled to THEIR OWN earnings. If you want earnings of your own, get out there, bend at the waist, and WORK FOR THEM. But no... it's so much easier to vote in jackasses who will jam their hands into the middle class' pockets for their constitutents, double fist it into their own pockets, and then flick loose change at the bottom 40% to ensure their future votes.

reply to post by xuenchen

xuenchenYour posts are hard to respond to because of your cherry picking and tangents.

In other words, you haven't found anything actually incorrect in them.

xuenchenBut as far as taxes and SS are concerned:
If you are under full retirement age for the entire year:

You can earn $15,120 gross wages or net self-employment a year and not lose any benefits in 2013.
We will deduct $1 in benefits for every $2 earned above $15,120.

Interesting quote. Although it would help your case if you could give a single example where this works out such that there is no benefit to working. I don't think you can.

Lets say you have a person making 30,000 per year, retiring at age 62 but keeps working for the same money. The benefit from SS in that case would be $9288 per year. but this is over the cap of $15120 by $14880 Benefits would be reduced by 1/2 the excess: $7440 so the net benefit would be 9288-7440 = $1148 giving a total income of 31148 for working and collecting SS. On SS alone, it would have been $9288 and working alone would have been $30000.

So, I don't see how this is going to work out in your favor at all. Go ahead and give an example where working doesn't help a social security recipient.

xuenchenAs for the rest of your rantings and peevings...
Thanks for confirming the jealousy.
Jealousy usually indicates failure.

You can fantasize about my personal life all you want, I don't mind, as long as you promise to imagine me in leather pants! Let's keep it on topic, though.

reply to post by DrEugeneFixer


Poor decisions?

More like college loans and a health condition. I guess getting an education with a chronic condition was a poor decision. We should have stayed in our place rather than aspiring to do better. Now, we're saddled with payments to the government out both ends - loan debt and tax burden. Between the two, we live extremely modestly even though we are solidly middle class.

And yes, we pinch every penny and I skip meals, sometimes more than one per day.

Maybe someday, we'll stop paying the student loans, but by then, we'll have Obamacare like a big fat monetary monkey on our backs.

reply to post by burdman30ott6

burdman30ott6
If you're purely looking at income taxes, you're right.... but wait, this current government has plenty of auxiliary taxes (and hand outs/"transfers") which are based on household income and thresholds at which each takes over or expires. It is very possible in 2013 America for an additional $1 in income for a year to equal thousands of dollars in additional tax liability as well as the loss of no-longer eligible tax breaks, subsidies, and credits.

Go ahead and name such a case, I challenge you! I think you're full of beans.

burdman30ott6
By the way, I rent a house and own one rig (a 20 year old SUV). I went to college so I could easily purchase a house, land, and drive a nice truck. I could do all of these things on my base salary, but it's not realistic when I'm watching it fly out the window to numerous taxes, inflation, regulatory costs, and various other hidden costs intended to subsidize the have nots.

What are you doing with your money? $60,000/yr to rent a house and maybe make payments on a used. Previously, you said you're not financially wealthy, but if you're not rapidly accumulating a large bank account, you must have some child support to pay or a bad drug habit. Something about this story is fishy.

What your scenario ignores is a simple fact: Man is entitled to THEIR OWN earnings.

Part of the price of living in a society is having social duties. One of these is paying taxes. If you don't like it, move to some place where they don't have taxes.

burdman30ott6
If you want earnings of your own, get out there, bend at the waist, and WORK FOR THEM. But no... it's so much easier to vote in jackasses who will jam their hands into the middle class' pockets for their constitutents, double fist it into their own pockets, and then flick loose change at the bottom 40% to ensure their future votes.

You keep assuming that I am some kind of welfare bum. This is personal for you, I get it, but it's not for me.

You keep ranting about the bottom 40% as if 40% of the population are a bunch of leeches. I've already explained to you how the overwhelming majority of the 'transfers' to people in the bottom 40% are just people getting benefits from medicare and social security, systems that they supported their whole lives with payments.

By the way, if you rent a house and only have one vehicle, at $60,000/yr, you should be quite comfortable and rapidly accumulating cash savings and investments. Sounds like either you aren't in the 40%, or you don't know how to handle money very well.