|   |   |   |   |   |   |   | 

Results 1 to 19 of 19
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Coto De Caza-- RT Jones
    Posts
    3,224
    Rep Power
    19

    Let's get Tax Fairness straight

    By ARI FLEISCHER
    If fairness in paying taxes means the amount you pay is based on the amount you make, then the only group in America paying at least a "fair share" is the top 20%—people who make more than $74,000. For everyone else, the tax code is a bargain.

    You wouldn't know this from President Obama's rhetoric, but our tax system, according to a recent report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), is incredibly progressive. Consider: The top 1% of income earners pay an average federal tax rate of 28.9%. (See the nearby table.) The average federal tax rate on the top 20% is 23.2%. The 20% of taxpayers earning between $50,100 and $73,999 pay an average 15.1%, and so on down the line. The CBO report includes payroll as well as income taxes paid.

    There's also another way of looking at fairness, and that's the tax burden. Here, consider the top 20% of income earners (over $74,000). They make 50% of the nation's income but pay nearly 70% of all federal taxes.

    The remaining 30% of the tax burden is borne by 80% of the taxpayers, those who make less than $74,000. In short, this group's share of taxes paid, 30%, is lower than the share of income they earn, 50%.

    Yet President Obama says that "for some time now, when compared to the middle class," the wealthy "haven't been asked to do their fair share."
    He's right that the system isn't fair, but not because the top 1% pay too little. It is because they pay too much.

    Mr. Obama has said that some wealthy employers pay a lower tax rate than their secretaries. True, some are able to lower their effective federal tax rate by giving millions to charity. Or because they derive much of their income as capital gains or from tax-free municipal bonds.

    But middle- and low-income Americans who do not invest also pay lower rates thanks to the deductions they receive, such as a $1,000 per child tax credit (which phases out for couples who make more than $110,000), or the Earned Income Tax Credit, which no one making more than $50,000 is supposed to receive.

    The CBO report ("The Distribution of Household Income and Federal Taxes, 2008 and 2009") covers the years 1979-2009. It makes plain that the impression conveyed by the president about what upper-income Americans pay in taxes does not hold up to scrutiny.

    First of all, the share of taxes paid by the top 20% has gone up over the last 30 years, while the share of taxes paid by everyone else has gone down. It has gone up despite the tax cuts enacted by President Clinton in 1997 and by President Bush in 2001 and 2003. But that makes no difference to the president. The only group of taxpayers he calls on to "sacrifice" are those already doing all the tax sacrificing.

    The top 20% in 1979 made 44.9% of the nation's income and paid 55.3% of all federal taxes. Thirty years later, the top 20% made 50.8% of the nation's income and their share of federal taxes paid had jumped to 67.9%.

    And the top 1%? In 1979, this group earned 8.9% of the nation's income and paid 14.2% of all federal taxes. In 2009, they earned 13.4% of the nation's income but their share of the federal tax burden rose to 22.3%.

    Meanwhile, the federal tax burden on middle- and lower-income earners is lighter. In 1979, the bottom 20% paid barely any taxes at all, just 2.1%. Now their share of taxes is a minuscule 0.3%. The burden on the middle-income earners ($34,900 to $50,100) has dropped too. In 1979, they paid 13.6% of all federal taxes; in 2009 they paid 9.4%.

    One reason our country is so divided is because the president keeps dividing us. If taxes need to be raised to fight a war or fund a cause, the president should ask everyone to pitch in. If the need is national, the solution should be national—and that includes all of us.

    But that's not how Mr. Obama governs. We learned during the 2008 campaign that he believes in spreading the wealth around. And recently we learned he doesn't believe that successful people made it on their own. Without the government, the president tells us, job creators and entrepreneurs would not be able to make it in America.

    It's really the other way around. Without job creators and the successful, the government wouldn't have any money. So next time Mr. Obama meets someone in the top 1% or even the top 20%, instead of saying they're not paying their fair share, he should simply say thank you.
    ================================================== ===========
    Last edited by Larryrsf; 07-24-2012 at 03:47 PM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Pacific Dunes, Bandon, OR
    Posts
    5,472
    Rep Power
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Larryrsf View Post
    By ARI FLEISCHER
    If fairness in paying taxes means the amount you pay is based on the amount you make, then the only group in America paying at least a "fair share" is the top 20%—people who make more than $74,000. For everyone else, the tax code is a bargain.

    You wouldn't know this from President Obama's rhetoric, but our tax system, according to a recent report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), is incredibly progressive. Consider: The top 1% of income earners pay an average federal tax rate of 28.9%. (See the nearby table.) The average federal tax rate on the top 20% is 23.2%. The 20% of taxpayers earning between $50,100 and $73,999 pay an average 15.1%, and so on down the line. The CBO report includes payroll as well as income taxes paid.

    There's also another way of looking at fairness, and that's the tax burden. Here, consider the top 20% of income earners (over $74,000). They make 50% of the nation's income but pay nearly 70% of all federal taxes.

    The remaining 30% of the tax burden is borne by 80% of the taxpayers, those who make less than $74,000. In short, this group's share of taxes paid, 30%, is lower than the share of income they earn, 50%.

    Yet President Obama says that "for some time now, when compared to the middle class," the wealthy "haven't been asked to do their fair share."
    He's right that the system isn't fair, but not because the top 1% pay too little. It is because they pay too much.

    Mr. Obama has said that some wealthy employers pay a lower tax rate than their secretaries. True, some are able to lower their effective federal tax rate by giving millions to charity. Or because they derive much of their income as capital gains or from tax-free municipal bonds.

    But middle- and low-income Americans who do not invest also pay lower rates thanks to the deductions they receive, such as a $1,000 per child tax credit (which phases out for couples who make more than $110,000), or the Earned Income Tax Credit, which no one making more than $50,000 is supposed to receive.

    The CBO report ("The Distribution of Household Income and Federal Taxes, 2008 and 2009") covers the years 1979-2009. It makes plain that the impression conveyed by the president about what upper-income Americans pay in taxes does not hold up to scrutiny.

    First of all, the share of taxes paid by the top 20% has gone up over the last 30 years, while the share of taxes paid by everyone else has gone down. It has gone up despite the tax cuts enacted by President Clinton in 1997 and by President Bush in 2001 and 2003. But that makes no difference to the president. The only group of taxpayers he calls on to "sacrifice" are those already doing all the tax sacrificing.

    The top 20% in 1979 made 44.9% of the nation's income and paid 55.3% of all federal taxes. Thirty years later, the top 20% made 50.8% of the nation's income and their share of federal taxes paid had jumped to 67.9%.

    And the top 1%? In 1979, this group earned 8.9% of the nation's income and paid 14.2% of all federal taxes. In 2009, they earned 13.4% of the nation's income but their share of the federal tax burden rose to 22.3%.

    Meanwhile, the federal tax burden on middle- and lower-income earners is lighter. In 1979, the bottom 20% paid barely any taxes at all, just 2.1%. Now their share of taxes is a minuscule 0.3%. The burden on the middle-income earners ($34,900 to $50,100) has dropped too. In 1979, they paid 13.6% of all federal taxes; in 2009 they paid 9.4%.

    One reason our country is so divided is because the president keeps dividing us. If taxes need to be raised to fight a war or fund a cause, the president should ask everyone to pitch in. If the need is national, the solution should be national—and that includes all of us.

    But that's not how Mr. Obama governs. We learned during the 2008 campaign that he believes in spreading the wealth around. And recently we learned he doesn't believe that successful people made it on their own. Without the government, the president tells us, job creators and entrepreneurs would not be able to make it in America.

    It's really the other way around. Without job creators and the successful, the government wouldn't have any money. So next time Mr. Obama meets someone in the top 1% or even the top 20%, instead of saying they're not paying their fair share, he should simply say thank you.
    ================================================== ===========
    Surely you meant "Let's" not "lets." Here's a link for you http://www.purohitnavigation.com/blo...p-lets-vs-lets

    At least you got the copy and paste down.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Masters
    Posts
    2,602
    Rep Power
    19
    This is another false issue meant to distract you from the fact that the dems and repubs are the exact same and bought out by the same money.

    The real question should be why are we spending so much, what are we spending it on, and who owns all our debt. Cut the spending in half, liquidate any ill gotten debt (most of it), and start applying the teachings of the Austrian School of economics...then we won't have to worry about collecting so much in taxes.
    The views expressed by The Purist do not necessarily represent the views of The Purist. Any posts by the Purist should not be relied upon for truth or accuracy, and should be viewed at your own risk.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Coto De Caza-- RT Jones
    Posts
    3,224
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by poe4soul View Post
    Surely you meant "Let's" not "lets." Here's a link for you http://www.purohitnavigation.com/blo...p-lets-vs-lets

    At least you got the copy and paste down.
    The apostrophe is obviously to shorten the contracted phrase from "let us" to "Let's"

    Thanks!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Pacific Dunes, Bandon, OR
    Posts
    5,472
    Rep Power
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Larryrsf View Post
    The apostrophe is obviously to shorten the contracted phrase from "let us" to "Let's"

    Thanks!
    You're welcome. Good to see you took the time to edited it.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Coto De Caza-- RT Jones
    Posts
    3,224
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by poe4soul View Post
    You're welcome. Good to see you took the time to edited it.
    Now you need to examine the difference between "their" and "they're"

    I doubt you should walk into a spelling and grammar fight with me. I have seen your posts for months and even years---and I suspect you bring a knife to a gunfight. Lets quit now. AND, this is a golf discussion forum. Let's not bore everyone.

    Larry

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pine Barrens
    Posts
    3,479
    Rep Power
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by The Purist View Post
    This is another false issue meant to distract you from the fact that the dems and repubs are the exact same and bought out by the same money.

    The real question should be why are we spending so much, what are we spending it on, and who owns all our debt. Cut the spending in half, liquidate any ill gotten debt (most of it), and start applying the teachings of the Austrian School of economics...then we won't have to worry about collecting so much in taxes.
    Right on. Neither candidate will step up to the plate and tell us about the pain we need to endure. The Democrats want to continue to spend. The Republicans want to continue to cut taxes. Neither solution will work, just as they haven't over the last 30 years. The math simply doesn't work. Of course, the politicians aren't to blame. We need only to point the finger at ourselves. I've resigned to sit back and watch the imminent collapse of the entire house of cards. It's happening in Europe, and without question will happen here.
    I keeps it real.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Coto De Caza-- RT Jones
    Posts
    3,224
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by buddha33 View Post
    Right on. Neither candidate will step up to the plate and tell us about the pain we need to endure. The Democrats want to continue to spend. The Republicans want to continue to cut taxes. Neither solution will work, just as they haven't over the last 30 years. The math simply doesn't work. Of course, the politicians aren't to blame. We need only to point the finger at ourselves. I've resigned to sit back and watch the imminent collapse of the entire house of cards. It's happening in Europe, and without question will happen here.
    http://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/EW5IdwltaAc?rel=0

    You may be right. There is simply not enough money in America to pay the debts we have incurred. Our moron government has promised entitlements that can be financed only by borrowing. More taxes would squash the small businesses that foster jobs. And past history has shown that more taxes after a certain point actually bring in LESS money because people with money take strong actions to avoid paying. They hire accountants, they renounce their citizenship, whatever is necessary to preserve what they have earned.

    The answer is to foster wildly successful new business, much like China did. They gave every entrepreneur enough slack to grow his idea and those businesses changed the world! They learned how to produce goods at prices that beat every competitor, so they got the deal!

    Larry

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    magnolia
    Posts
    2,040
    Rep Power
    19
    China ain't a good example. The slopes were how many years behind us in technology and just now are catching up. They finally expanded their economy by getting rid of all of 60sdude's ideas about a perfect society. (No offense intended Pky)
    Bridgestone J38 10.5, Srixon 2,3,4 hybrids. Snake Eyes Viper Tour
    Eidolon 52,56 and 60 wedges.
    Bettinardi sb-5+ putter.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Chambers Bay is my favourite (it is not my location)
    Posts
    2,777
    Rep Power
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Larryrsf View Post
    Now you need to examine the difference between "their" and "they're"

    I doubt you should walk into a spelling and grammar fight with me. I have seen your posts for months and even years---and I suspect you bring a knife to a gunfight. Lets quit now. AND, this is a golf discussion forum. Let's not bore everyone.
    This is the non-golf discussion portion of a golf discussion board. Most of us can tell that by the name it's been given:

    "Non-Golf Discussion"

    And when it suits you, you seem to post non-golf content here on a pretty regular basis.

    TaylorMade r7 9.5°
    TM 200 Steel 3-wood
    TM 3 Hybrid
    Titleist AP2 w/Project X shafts 3-PW
    Cleveland 52°, Titleist Vokey 56° & 60°
    Tommy Armour Model 6 putter.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Pacific Dunes, Bandon, OR
    Posts
    5,472
    Rep Power
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Larryrsf View Post
    Now you need to examine the difference between "their" and "they're"

    I doubt you should walk into a spelling and grammar fight with me. I have seen your posts for months and even years---and I suspect you bring a knife to a gunfight. Lets quit now. AND, this is a golf discussion forum. Let's not bore everyone.

    Larry
    Whatever. I have admitted i suck at both. But you on the other hand are the one to run to grammar and spelling when you loose based on content. It's probably similar reason you were a physicist editing other physicist's grammar and spelling.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pine Barrens
    Posts
    3,479
    Rep Power
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by Larryrsf View Post
    The answer is to foster wildly successful new business, much like China did. They gave every entrepreneur enough slack to grow his idea and those businesses changed the world! They learned how to produce goods at prices that beat every competitor, so they got the deal!
    No, the answer is to take our medicine and realize we can't grow our way out of this. We need to reduce spending AND increase taxes to widdle away the deficit that's been accruing since Reagan. This isn't about Democrat or Republican. This is about our government, regardless of who's at the helm, making promising it can't keep. We've lived beyond our means for years and it's time to suffer the consequences.

    Neither Obama or Romney are willing to stand up and tell us these truths. They keep shoveling us fairy tales of better days to come even though the math simply doesn't work. Since that's what we want to hear, the liars keep getting elected. Meanwhile, people like Ron Paul, who actually tell the truth, get no play with the sheep because they have a depressing story to tell (even though it's the facts). That's why we have only ourselves to blame.

    BTW, China is a horrible example. China is intentionally manipulating its currency to increase the attractiveness of its exports which it already has a huge advantage on because of cheap labor (due to lower standards of living and horrible labor laws). It's impossible for us to use China's formula because our economies are completely different.
    I keeps it real.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Wentworth-by-the-Sea
    Posts
    3,228
    Rep Power
    19
    We can't cut entitlements and pretend to be a civilized nation. We've got to raise taxes and slash defense spending.

    Our ever continuing wars haven't been defensive since 1941-45. No soldier killed since then has died defending America. They were all sacrificed to enrich war profiteers. And before that, we have to go back to 1812, not counting the civil war. The Spanish American War and WWI were total bullsh!t as well.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Masters
    Posts
    2,602
    Rep Power
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by buddha33 View Post
    No, the answer is to take our medicine and realize we can't grow our way out of this. We need to reduce spending AND increase taxes to widdle away the deficit that's been accruing since Reagan. This isn't about Democrat or Republican. This is about our government, regardless of who's at the helm, making promising it can't keep. We've lived beyond our means for years and it's time to suffer the consequences.

    Neither Obama or Romney are willing to stand up and tell us these truths. They keep shoveling us fairy tales of better days to come even though the math simply doesn't work. Since that's what we want to hear, the liars keep getting elected. Meanwhile, people like Ron Paul, who actually tell the truth, get no play with the sheep because they have a depressing story to tell (even though it's the facts). That's why we have only ourselves to blame.

    BTW, China is a horrible example. China is intentionally manipulating its currency to increase the attractiveness of its exports which it already has a huge advantage on because of cheap labor (due to lower standards of living and horrible labor laws). It's impossible for us to use China's formula because our economies are completely different.
    Funk that increasing taxes and widdling the debt thing. It would be a lot easier to default, liquidate, and rebuild, then to try and save that pile o'debt. It used to be legit debt, and much of it still is legit, but the ponzi players have it completely infiltrated and poisoned...innocent victims are going to go down either way. Might as well make it quick and easy, rather than slow and painful.
    The views expressed by The Purist do not necessarily represent the views of The Purist. Any posts by the Purist should not be relied upon for truth or accuracy, and should be viewed at your own risk.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Spyglass
    Posts
    11,184
    Rep Power
    34
    Did anyone see the ad endorsed by Obama? It shows Romney giving a speech to a crowd and he starts singing "America". While he's singing (very poorly by the way) words come across the screen such as "Romney invests money in the Cayman Islands" and "Romney avoided paying taxes, by doing this and that". I have to say, it was a brilliant ad. I'm not voting for Obama but they hit a home run with that one. It makes Romney look silly and out of touch. It's amazing how television impacts an election.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Pine Barrens
    Posts
    3,479
    Rep Power
    23
    Quote Originally Posted by famousdavis View Post
    Did anyone see the ad endorsed by Obama? It shows Romney giving a speech to a crowd and he starts singing "America". While he's singing (very poorly by the way) words come across the screen such as "Romney invests money in the Cayman Islands" and "Romney avoided paying taxes, by doing this and that". I have to say, it was a brilliant ad. I'm not voting for Obama but they hit a home run with that one. It makes Romney look silly and out of touch. It's amazing how television impacts an election.
    Agreed. Both sides have had some pretty damaging ads thus far. It's going to be a tight race although once the debates start, I believe Obama will pull away (assuming there hasn't been a full-blown economic collapse). Romney's currently benefitting from the fact that most people aren't seeing him talk. As soon as the spotlight is on him full-time, people will realize he's 75% titanium/steel composite. His speech after the Colorado shootings was nauseating.
    I keeps it real.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    ChiselCreek
    Posts
    3,990
    Rep Power
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by jt1135 View Post
    China ain't a good example. The slopes were how many years behind us in technology and just now are catching up. They finally expanded their economy by getting rid of all of 60sdude's ideas about a perfect society. (No offense intended Pky)
    You can't offend a high achiever... Smart people talk less and listen more, that's why we hire smart young Ph.Ds to carry on the science because the 60s dude will be retiring in about 2 yrs and start a new thing in life... either teaching or chasing young girls

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    St. Andrews
    Posts
    1,019
    Rep Power
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by buddha33 View Post
    Agreed. Both sides have had some pretty damaging ads thus far. It's going to be a tight race although once the debates start, I believe Obama will pull away (assuming there hasn't been a full-blown economic collapse). Romney's currently benefitting from the fact that most people aren't seeing him talk. As soon as the spotlight is on him full-time, people will realize he's 75% titanium/steel composite. His speech after the Colorado shootings was nauseating.
    Yes, somebody please get him a qualified speechwriter as quickly as possible. Right now he must have overseas, underage children writing them at a discount. I guess it's easy to get carried away once you start sending jobs overseas.

    There are a host of Hollywood screenwriters who could go toe to toe with the golden tongued Obama. Larry, find the guy that wrote the screenplay for Rudy and it's all over.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Harding Park
    Posts
    2,025
    Rep Power
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by Larryrsf View Post

    Larry

    It's not my fault God made me this beautiful.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •