Quit Complaining -- $100K-Plus Earners Pay 72% of Federal Income Taxes

reply to post by xuenchen


What percentage of the money do they have though, and what percentage of federal spending benefits them in what proportion? Do the people paying 76% of taxes have 76% of the money and 76% of the benefit of tax money, or is it closer to 80 or 90%, in which case they wouldn't even be pulling their own weight?

What burden do I put on the roads? One chevy. What burden does a shareholder in a shipping company put on the roads? Pay your fair share and laugh all the way to the bank anyway. Or if the money just isn't worth it anymore, I know some guys with a truck who will show up anytime you want- just leave it on the curb.

yeah, that's how progressive tax system is meant to work op. That statistic is useless: 72% of federal income tax is paid by 100k and above earners.

how does it correlate to unemployment, if unemployment rate was 0, then you might have something to talk about
it's just common sense that most income taxes will be paid by millionaires, it's basic math with a flat tax rate: 1 guy makes 30k and pays 5k, someone else makes 30 million and pays 5 million, NO WAY!?!?! So that 1 person will = 1,000 average guys.


the real question is why do we pay personal income tax? corporate income tax can and should pay for all basic necessities.

macman
reply to post by daskakik

 

And yet those in Poverty are driving around in said vehicles. While tax payers fund them to eat and live in rent controlled housing that is offset by taxes.

If you actually believe this fairy tale, then guess what. A big furry rabbit is coming to your house this Sunday to lay chocolate eggs at your door step. What's it like, believing in BS?

I have never met a single person on welfare driving anything more expensive than a beat up mid 90's Camry. And that's if they even own a vehicle. I work around a lot of welfare recipients. Most take public transit because they don't have a vehicle.

Big TV's? Try again. I currently am taking care of a terminally ill woman in public housing who has a large 20 year old TV that she received from a charity that donates household items to the poor and newly housed. In fact, in all the low income housing units I have been in, the only time I've seen a plasma TV in anyone's place was when they got it donated from various local charities. Costco and other local businesses frequently donate excess, old, or slightly damaged, unsalable goods to various local charities. When I lived in the VA transitional housing, we frequently got electronics and beds donated to our center to be distributed to those of us veterans who just got off the streets. But again, nice try.

Donations
Make a Home Foundation
VAA
Share House

iphones? I've seen very few poor people on benefits with iphones. Most have the notorious "Obama phone" which is about as far away from a iphone as you can get. Do you even know what an "Obamaphone" is? They are these cheap, dialpad only primitive kyocera phones that were top of the line.....11 years ago. They have no camera, primitive graphics capability, no keyboard, and users are limited to 250 call minutes a month, plus 250 texts. They are hardly "iphones". Hell, they are cheaper and more primitive than old flip tops.

Assurance Wireless

They are bare bones communication devices.

Wanna try again?

Seriously, instead of reading whatever conserva-tard bs propoganda you choose to get your fairy tales from, I'd actually try looking at legit sources. Instead of touting your favorite 1 in 100,000 welfare fraud cases, which represent about a fraction of life for the rest of the people receiving some form of assistance.

you want to know about taxes?

win a $400mil powerball.

how much do you get from that 400mil?

that ticks me off.

here in HK, if it says 30mil, you get 30mil. no taxes.

bah, the feds still owe me $400.00. stupid me, i didn't file before i moved.

i wonder if i can get interest on that, hmmmm.

reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf


Sorry, I shop with them every single month. They have name brand clothing, smart phones and load up nice big SUVs and always pay with EBTs. They exist.

I grew up across the street from a family who lived on welfare. They had a big screen TV. It was large enough that we could sit on our porch and watch it through their screen door.

Maybe, you just haven't been around the ones who game the system and supplement their income "creatively."

reply to post by ketsuko


Do you know them personally? Do you know for a fact they are on welfare completely?

I have some designer clothes. I bought them at Value Village and Goodwill.

I also have some designer gear that cost hundreds, sometimes thousands, new, and I got them from the YWCA Working Women Wardrobe. Basically, it is a select clothing bank that only takes donations of quality clothing, accessories, and toiletries in very good condition. Basically, it's a place where poor and homeless women who have no decent clothes go to get items suitable for job interviews. I have went there a couple times, as when I came home and was looking for work, all I had was wore out, crappy street clothes. I went there, they give you a certain amount of time to go through and pick out office/interview attire. The clothing is all donated. And where I went, both in downtown Seattle and in Redmond, the items were mostly high end designer clothing that had been donated by the many wealthy people in the area (Redmond especially, as that's Microsoft's home turf, and there's a lot of money in that area, so the items getting donated are all high end).

For example, I saw a few pairs of Jimmy Choo shoes. Look up Jimmy Choos, if you are unfamiliar with them. These are shoes that at bottom range, go for 500-600 bucks a pair. Yet there they were, available for a homeless woman to wear if she so chose them. Because someone DONATED them. There were also Prada purses, DNKY blouses, Eddie Bauer jackets. All free if I chose them. I myself didn't care about designer labels, and still don't. I just chose items that not only fit me, but looked good and appropriate for trying to land a job. Out of the items I picked out, over half were some high end name brand that in real life, I'd never be able to reasonably afford unless I was making 100k a year or more. So, a person seeing me walking around in all this high end gear but living at a homeless shelter would have drawn a totally inaccurate conclusion about me.

For a person with zero income, your welfare allowance here, in one of the most expensive metro areas in the country, is a whopping 197 a month. You couldn't pay the gas for an Escalade, let alone afford insurance, maintenance, ect. And free housing....well, not only do you have to get on a minimum two year waiting list for section 8. They sure as hell don't hand that out to anyone, and right now, section 8 applications are closed except for elderly and disabled. Even with a section 8 voucher, if you looked at the majority of places that accept it, and are within the price range of section 8, well, you'd have to pay someone to live in those dumps. No one in their right mind would choose to dwell in these places if they had another choice. Many, including the transitional housing unit I work at, are only one step up from the homeless shelter. Most apartment complexes that don't want section 8 simply jack their rents out of the price range of the voucher. You are only allowed to use the voucher within a limited price bracket, which from what I have seen, is lower than the average area. So it's not like section 8 is going to put you in a penthouse.

Do I know people who BS the system? Yep. I've known a few. They were also druggies. They spent their paltry welfare checks on dope, and if they had iphones, nice cars, or designer clothing, it's because it was either stolen or donated. Tax payers certainly didn't foot the bill for their toys, just their drug habit (which I totally agree druggies who don't want to change or get help should not be offered any assistance until they want to clean up their act and become humans again). And of the druggie cheats, none of them could hold onto their stuff longer than a couple weeks before they pawn it off for more dope money.

The majority of people receiving some sort of assistance do not want to be on it forever, and only get just below the bare minimum of what is needed to maintain life and safety from the government. Anything else comes from charities and local agencies who are stretched to their limits, and have difficulty coping with need. They would like to have their own income and opportunities, without restrictions, so instead of scraps and hand me downs, they can actually buy those TVs, Xboxes, iphones, escalades, and Eddie Bauer jackets everyone mistakenly thinks they get from the government. Unfortunately, they aren't going to get there without help. The cheats will always be there, but they will always be in the minority.

It's just like the gun debate. A couple of crazy jackasses go shooting up schools and army bases, so that must mean that all gun owners and veterans are crazy, evil whack jobs who should have their right to bear arms taken away. All guns should be banned, in fact! Because people having guns just makes the world more evil and makes people want to kill each other, let's ban them! Right?

Nope. We all know the gun control argument is an epic fail not grounded in reality. Just like the government assistance haters. You don't group sane, law abiding gun owners with the whack jobs anymore than you do the needy with the cheats.

reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf



These are all things I see on a daily basis. I personally don't need your identified "conserva-tard bs propoganda" in order to actually see what is happening.

Go to any low income apartments in my area, and I can see this for myself. Or I can go to any grocery store and see this.

Unlike the people on the left, I don't need CNN, The Daily Show or any other program to tell me what is going on.

But again, let's continue to take from me, to give to others.

xuenchen
reply to post by HanzHenry

 

Sounds more like gleaming jealousy doesn't it?

Now those very same people are watching you criticize them.

What do ya think they will think and do now?

Why would the wealthy do anything? Ever since Reagan was in office except for Clinton the taxes for the wealthy has been dropping while the average workers taxes went up. You have people that make millions a year but only pays around 15 to 17 percent while the average worker pays 35 to 37 percent. You are saying the wealthy pays more than the average worker well duh a person would have to be a simpleton not to know this when you make more you pay more.

But the average worker does pay more of his income into the system than a wealthy person does. Simply because the wealthy has far more disposable income than the average worker does after paying taxes. So who really pays more in taxes? The same as always the average working man does. What this country needs is a flat tax system where everyone pays the same percentage no matter how you make your money.

Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

macman
reply to post by daskakik

 

And yet those in Poverty are driving around in said vehicles. While tax payers fund them to eat and live in rent controlled housing that is offset by taxes.

If you actually believe this fairy tale, then guess what. A big furry rabbit is coming to your house this Sunday to lay chocolate eggs at your door step. What's it like, believing in BS?

I have never met a single person on welfare driving anything more expensive than a beat up mid 90's Camry. And that's if they even own a vehicle. I work around a lot of welfare recipients. Most take public transit because they don't have a vehicle.

Big TV's? Try again. I currently am taking care of a terminally ill woman in public housing who has a large 20 year old TV that she received from a charity that donates household items to the poor and newly housed. In fact, in all the low income housing units I have been in, the only time I've seen a plasma TV in anyone's place was when they got it donated from various local charities. Costco and other local businesses frequently donate excess, old, or slightly damaged, unsalable goods to various local charities. When I lived in the VA transitional housing, we frequently got electronics and beds donated to our center to be distributed to those of us veterans who just got off the streets. But again, nice try.

Donations
Make a Home Foundation
VAA
Share House

iphones? I've seen very few poor people on benefits with iphones. Most have the notorious "Obama phone" which is about as far away from a iphone as you can get. Do you even know what an "Obamaphone" is? They are these cheap, dialpad only primitive kyocera phones that were top of the line.....11 years ago. They have no camera, primitive graphics capability, no keyboard, and users are limited to 250 call minutes a month, plus 250 texts. They are hardly "iphones". Hell, they are cheaper and more primitive than old flip tops.

Assurance Wireless

They are bare bones communication devices.

Wanna try again?

Seriously, instead of reading whatever conserva-tard bs propoganda you choose to get your fairy tales from, I'd actually try looking at legit sources. Instead of touting your favorite 1 in 100,000 welfare fraud cases, which represent about a fraction of life for the rest of the people receiving some form of assistance.

Basically these people stand around eye balling other people, sizing them up for welfare lol

I have heard of Gaydar - but Welfaredar is a new one.

reply to post by macman

As stated before, my issue is with and has always been with a Govt that steals from me to give to others because of their poor life choices.

No the government doesn't steal a dime from you to pay for social services. All taxes that comes from income goes directly to the Federal Reserve all money that pays for the services is borrowed. It would be better if the money they took in taxes did pay for those services that way we wouldn't have to pay interest on the money the government borrows.

reply to post by buster2010

What this country needs is a flat tax system where everyone pays the same percentage no matter how you make your money.

I can absolutely agree. If this were put into play, the likelihood of another tax increase would bottom out.

Let's say the government falls short. Needs to raise everyone's taxes by 1%. My 1% translates into a lot fewer dollars than the high earner. Since it's the high earner who's doing all the 'important' voting (e.g. the votes that are actually counted), I can bet that guy's gonna vote with his wallet ... and that means no tax increase.

If we DID go to a flat tax, I'd hope they hammer the folks who've been squirreling away their ill-gotten gains for years.

eNumbra

Taxpayers earning $100,000 or more a year pay 71.6% of the nation’s share in individual federal income taxes, according to the latest data from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from 2011.

Yet more propagandist statistics abuse to convince the foolish that the wealthy are overburdened.

Of course, if you take all of the top earners and combined what they pay it's going to be a majority of what's generated. I'll show you some simple numbers to explain

Tom makes 20,000 a year and pays 10% in taxes, that's 2,000
Bob makes 200,000 a year and pays 5% in taxes, that's 10,000.
Bob still pays the government the same as 5 toms, so what should we do?
In America people cry out, "it's not fair, save Bob, he's paying more than Tom". Everywhere else, people wonder why Tom is giving up a greater portion of his yearly income than Bob is, despite the fact that Bob can obviously stand to pay more.

And that's the inherent problem. The higher wage earners aren't as burdened by taxes as the rest of the world but they still have their advocates. Surely we should abolish the IRS and the insane tax code they've developed and come up with something more logical, something that would actually sustain this country, after we fix all of the other economic problems.

But I dare say it would require the tiniest pinch of socialist ideas.

But that's not true, Bob already pays 33% a rate 3x that of Tom and $66,000 of that $200k--the equivalent of 33 Toms, so you are being very disingenuous in your example. Did you actually look up the income tax rate of a person earning $200K?

So Tom is not giving up an greater annual portion of his income than Bob, Bob is giving up a greater portion of HIS income than Tom is.

You assume Bob can afford to pay more but you haven't a clue as to the economic issues Bob faces--a hundred thousand in professional school loans? A quarter million small business loan? You haven't a clue what Bob can or cannot afford.

Certainly we should abolish our Marxist progressive income tax and establish either a flat tax or a national sales tax in its stead. This is the only just way to tax people.

reply to post by buster2010


We are not talking about the relationship set up with the Fed Reserve, nor are we addressing the issue of taxes paying for the interest on money borrowed.

For all argument sake, taxes are removed from my pay, in order to fund the Govt, which in turn uses those funds to give to others.

Just because you have inserted a "middleman", doesn't remove the fact that my pay is taken to basically go to someone else.

AnIntellectualRedneck
Huffington Post Article

By contrast, the share of total net worth held by the weathiest 1 percent of American households continued rising, hitting 34.5 percent in 2010. The top 10 percent's share was 74.5 percent.

It says before that that the bottom half of Americans own just over 1 percent of the wealth in the country.

Most of us pay more than our fair share when you consider the scraps that we're given and the scraps that we're expected to survive on.

Wanting a fair wage for the value that I add to a company and to not be treated like an animal while I'm working doesn't make me a bad person. If you think it does, then you're the enemy of every working man, woman, and youngster in this country, plain and simple, including your own self and your family.


I'm poor. That doesn't make a bad person, that doesn't make me lazy, and that doesn't make me some kind of animal that it's okay to spit on whenever you feel like you pay too much in taxes. It's not my fault that the government is taxing you and me both to death. I don't make the rules, I don't make the laws, and I have a whole lot less power than those folks at the very top that lobby the crap out of Congress.

On thing you gots to do is transcend the self identification with money and economic status. We all need to do it.

buster2010

xuenchen
reply to post by HanzHenry

 

Sounds more like gleaming jealousy doesn't it?

Now those very same people are watching you criticize them.

What do ya think they will think and do now?

Why would the wealthy do anything? Ever since Reagan was in office except for Clinton the taxes for the wealthy has been dropping while the average workers taxes went up. You have people that make millions a year but only pays around 15 to 17 percent while the average worker pays 35 to 37 percent. You are saying the wealthy pays more than the average worker well duh a person would have to be a simpleton not to know this when you make more you pay more.

But the average worker does pay more of his income into the system than a wealthy person does. Simply because the wealthy has far more disposable income than the average worker does after paying taxes. So who really pays more in taxes? The same as always the average working man does. What this country needs is a flat tax system where everyone pays the same percentage no matter how you make your money.

But that is disingenuous because you are comparing income tax to capital gains tax--very different thing.

A worker that makes 50k pays a much lower rate on his salary than a movie star that makes 1 million a year. ( Federal tax rate on 50k is 25% and on a million is 39.6%). When people say that the higher wage earners are taxed less than the lower wage earners, this is untrue.

YEs, capital gains peaks at a less rate than income tax. This is for twofold reasons. Your money is taxed once already when you earn it, so investments bought with that money are taxed at a lower rate--they already got a first bite, and it is not just to take the same sized bite the second go around. The second reason is that the government wants to encourage investment to keep that capital flowing into the economy, nor hoarded in bonds or under mattresses, which is why they punish investment less--to discourage exactly what "progressives" bitch about: sitting on a big pile of money instead of putting it back into circulation and the economy.

Secondly, it is a lie that the wealthy pay less of capital gains.

•0% applies to long-term gains and dividend income if a person is in the 10% and 15% tax brackets,
•15% applies to long-term gains and dividend income if a person is in the 25%, 28%, 33%, or 35% tax brackets, and
•20% applies to long-term gains and dividend income if a person is in the 39.6% tax bracket.

The capital gains tax is ALSO a progressive system with the higher income earners paying a larger percentage.

If a worker sells his house, or a piece of land, or cashes in a retirement account and makes a profit, his capital gains tax on that investment profit will be ZERO (and, contrary to leftist propaganda, investing is not just a "rich" thing. Anyone with a retirement account is an investor.) if his annual income is less than $40K.

Thus, it is a lie and (a deliberate one) to say that the "wealthy" are taxed less than the poor or worker.

burdman30ott6

eNumbra
Yet more propagandist statistics abuse to convince the foolish that the wealthy are overburdened.

CORK IT. $100,000 is NOT "wealthy" in America 2014. $100K is middle class, still only a month of lost paychecks away from losing everything.

Wealthy wasn't referring to the $100k earners in that statement, so much as those above the $1M a year, it wasn't a statement pointed at anyone other than the self-serving media and corporate interests that produce that trash in order to convince the ignorant masses that the government is broke because of Escalades and food stamps.


And anyone who's only a month from losing everything is stretching their means; living on a tightrope is no less a choice than the ones macman is rallying everyone against.


In addendum:
They included down to the 100k earners in order to include the middle class, those who are most often in the push and pull between wealth and poverty to foment them against the poor in this case. It's the wealthy using the middle class(the ever waning middle class mind you) against themselves and the poor to protect their own interests.

reply to post by Snarl

I too am for a Flat tax.

EVERYONE pays the same percentage. No matter what.

No write offs, no loopholes

reply to post by eNumbra


The Govt is broke on many levels. One of them is trying to provide stuff to people to buy votes.

I can't help it that you and others don't want to grasp the idea that just because handouts don't equal 100%, it isn't an issue.

NavyDoc
But that's not true, Bob already pays 33% a rate 3x that of Tom and $66,000 of that $200k--the equivalent of 33 Toms, so you are being very disingenuous in your example. Did you actually look up the income tax rate of a person earning $200K?

So Tom is not giving up an greater annual portion of his income than Bob, Bob is giving up a greater portion of HIS income than Tom is.

You assume Bob can afford to pay more but you haven't a clue as to the economic issues Bob faces--a hundred thousand in professional school loans? A quarter million small business loan? You haven't a clue what Bob can or cannot afford.

Certainly we should abolish our Marxist progressive income tax and establish either a flat tax or a national sales tax in its stead. This is the only just way to tax people.

Did YOU look up the income tax rate of a person earning $200K in taxable income? It's most certainly not 33%.

Our system is based on marginal income tax rates. Do you know what marginal income tax rate means? It means, in a bracket, you pay X% on income earned in that bracket. This means parts of that $200K is taxed at different rates.

Here's what it would look like using 2013 brackets for a single individual return (it's a LOT different for married)-
10% $0 – $8,925
15% $8,926 – $36,250
25% $36,251 – $87,850
28% $87,851 – $183,250
33% $183,251 – $398,350

So, on the first $8,925, he has to pay 10% ($892.50). On the next $27,324, he has to pay 15% ($4,098.60). On the next $51,599, he has to pay 25% ($12,899.75). On the next $95,399, he has to pay 28% ($26,711.72). On the final $16,749, he has to pay 33% ($5,527.17).

Total income is $200,000 and total tax liabilities is now $50,129.74, which is barely over 25%.

Far too many people don't seem to understand that marginal rates work like this. I've seen stories of people NOT wanting to earn a little more money because it would put them in a higher tax bracket, which they assumed would mean they would earn less due to higher tax rates. This, obviously, is stupid and wrong - but even highly educated individuals like medical doctors have had this idea.

macman
The Govt is broke on many levels. One of them is trying to provide stuff to people to buy votes.

I can't help it that you and others don't want to grasp the idea that just because handouts don't equal 100%, it isn't an issue.

I don't know about others but I grasp and see the issue but I also see quite a bit of hyperbole.

I would say that those people you are complaining about, which ironically is part of the thread title, have learned to work that broken system.

That doesn't include those that use those services as a hand up instead of a hand out but you seem to be quick to lump them all.

In the end, without juding anybody, I don't really see what you think all the complaining is going to accomplish. You seem to be wishing for an america that never was.