45 % of americans pay no federal income tax.

[jaeger19]

No, thats still not fair, because the more you make, the more you pay, for the same service. Imagine paying for hamburgers that way. A poor person would get it for 1 cent. A rich person would pay $1000. Is that fair, ie. equal?

Rich people get far more out of government than do poor people. I am a rich person.. I get that. Rich people benefit from patent protection, a judicial system that enforces contracts, fire protection, road systems, military. etc.

 

[KLATTU]

The rich consume more than the poor. Sure, its a smaller share of their income, but its a larger share of the economy. Thus, the rich do most of the consuming, not the poor.

Economist's View: Consumption and Income Inequality

Not only that, The Gruberites ( shouldn't we call them the Sanderites now?) think that money invested is not productive to the economy. Only spending is. LAFFRIOT

 

[ARealConservative]

Rich people get far more out of government than do poor people. I am a rich person.. I get that. Rich people benefit from patent protection, a judicial system that enforces contracts, fire protection, road systems, military. etc.

we all benefit from those things.

poor people put more of a strain on the very services that need paid for. it is easy to make a counter argument that they should be paying for those services.

 

[jaeger19]

we all benefit from those things.

poor people put more of a strain on the very services that need paid for. it is easy to make a counter argument that they should be paying for those services.

Rich people benefit more. We use more of these services.. and we use services that poor people don't generally need or care about.

There is no counter argument that they should be paying for those services when they use them and benefit from them so much less than a rich person.

I use the mail WAY WAY WAY more than the average person. I use roads and ship heavy loads over those roads and bridges... way way way.. more than the average person. I have to have a judicial system that will enforce contracts way more than the average person. I get patent protection that a poor person could care less about..other than it makes his costs greater because of lack of competition.

The average person could care less whether the US is keeping the straits of Hormuz open to oil shipment. For me and a whole host or rich people.. it means a lot.

 

[Beaudreaux]

Erm.... That is not even REMOTELY what is happening. As I wrote to Klaatu:

There are many other types of taxes people pay, notably payroll taxes,

If you're talking about FICA, that is minimal and is only for Social Security and Medicare. Calling FICA a Payroll Tax without defining it as really what it is, is disingenuous at the very least or an intentional misrepresentation to obfuscate and cloud the argument at worst.

real estate taxes, sales taxes.

Those are not federal taxes, they do not have anything to do with the costs of federal programs, national defense, or other federal government costs paid by the 55% that the 45% get a free ride on. Plus what this thread is discussing is federal income taxes.

3/5 of those who don't pay federal income taxes do in fact work, meaning that at a minimum, they're subject to payroll taxes.

There's that term again. Except this time, the way you discuss it makes me think you don't actually understand what a payroll tax actually is, as I described it above. Even if yu're not discussing FICA, the EITC gives the 45% all their money back, which is why they effectively pay no taxes.

Roughly 20-25% are seniors, who are collecting Social Security.

And?

The top 20% earns roughly 60% of all income in the US, and they pay roughly 69% of all federal taxes. That is not, by any stretch of the imagination, an extortionate rate. It's also close to the lowest it's been in 30 years.

The amount of money the top 60% makes is irrelevant in this discussion, except from a point of envy or disdain for their ability to do so. Here's the real numbers - and a link: http://taxfoundation.org/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/docs/Fig1_0.png

The top 10% pays 70.2% of all Personal Federal Income Tax.

However, as the OP shows, once EITC and other deductions are applied, the top 55% pay ALL the taxes. So your 60% number is way off base. Even in the chart I am showing, it gives the bottom 50% only 2.8% of all Personal Income Taxes Paid, which may or may not account for the 5% DELTA in the numbers of people with the OP's number of 45%.

So, it really is not the case that there are 45 million slackers who refuse to contribute. Most of them work or are retired.

Didn't say they were slackers, but they damned sure don't contribute. Not to the Federal Budget. Which means they are taking a free ride on the backs of those that do have to pay federal income taxes. The facts bear that out.

 

[ARealConservative]

Rich people benefit more. We use more of these services.. and we use services that poor people don't generally need or care about.

There is no counter argument that they should be paying for those services when they use them and benefit from them so much less than a rich person.

I use the mail WAY WAY WAY more than the average person. I use roads and ship heavy loads over those roads and bridges... way way way.. more than the average person. I have to have a judicial system that will enforce contracts way more than the average person. I get patent protection that a poor person could care less about..other than it makes his costs greater because of lack of competition.

The average person could care less whether the US is keeping the straits of Hormuz open to oil shipment. For me and a whole host or rich people.. it means a lot.

The average person benefits from cheap fuel costs. They benefit from roads (which is mostly a state thing anyway) Mail is a pay as you go service. You pay for what you use.

Your examples are just odd.

Let’s talk about the programs that are truly costly. How often do you use medicare?


ps - if I am reading this right, the patent office makes money - your fees are pretty high apparently

http://www.uspto.gov/about/stratplan/ar/USPTOFY2014PAR.pdf

 

[Beaudreaux]

The poor do their part by spending all their income to live.

What? Seriously? They do not pay taxes, but get the benefit of the taxes from others. That AIN"T doing their part. Unless you're saying that "their part" is to take from others and spend on themselves? Wow. What a concept of defining "personal responsibility" which is another way of saying "doing their part."

The wealthy not so much.

How do you know what the wealthy do with their money? Are you wealthy? Do you sit on your money, or do you spend it?

Spending is what makes this country go round not sitting on billions and wanting to pay even less in taxes then their already record low rate.

Record low rates? The top 55% pay 100% of the taxes. How the hell is that a record low???? The top 10% pays 70.2% - how the hell is that a record low???? The Top 1% pays 38.1% of ALL personal income taxes paid in this country - that's MORE THAN enough for one group to pay.

The bottom 45% need to get the hell out of the wagon and push like the rest of us.

 

[jonny5]

Rich people get far more out of government than do poor people. I am a rich person.. I get that. Rich people benefit from patent protection, a judicial system that enforces contracts, fire protection, road systems, military. etc.

So do poor people, but they pay less for it. However, 75% of all spending goes to social programs which the not rich almost solely benefit from. Medicaid, Education, Food Stamps, Welfare.

 

[SocialD]

45% of Americans pay no federal income tax - MarketWatch
Despite the fact that rich people paying little in the way of income taxes makes plenty of headlines, this is the exception to the rule: The top 1% of taxpayers pay a higher effective income-tax rate than any other group (around 23%, according to a report released by the Tax Policy Center in 2014) — nearly seven times higher than those in the bottom 50%.

On average, those in the bottom 40% of the income spectrum end up getting money from the government. Meanwhile, the richest 20% of Americans, by far, pay the most in income taxes, forking over nearly 87% of all the income tax collected by Uncle Sam.

Rich people pay nearly 87% of all federal individual income tax in America.

This was the same thing Romney was demonized for last election cycle when he said 45% pay no income taxes. it was actually 46.6% at the time.

 

[Master PO]

So it sounds fair that the poor pay tax on 100% of their income while the rich only pay on a small % of theirs? How is that fair?

the poor pay very little in taxes, about 3% of all income taxes paid.

the idea of taxes was that they be uniform, and progressive taxes are not.

 

[ARealConservative]

So do poor people, but they pay less for it. However, 75% of all spending goes to social programs which the not rich almost solely benefit from. Medicaid, Education, Food Stamps, Welfare.

it is surprising to see a conservative espouse his it takes a village stuff.

the patent one is most alarming. I/P protection is good for all of us, rich and poor. If we don't protect intellectual property, nobody will risk time talent and treasure to do anything, and we would all suffer.

about a decade ago, my mom came down with cancer. she had no insurance. I am happy to say she is alive and well today, and the sole reason is because wealth truly does trickle down.

nobody would of came up with life saving cancer treatments with my mom in mind because she couldn't pay for much of anything. yet with no money, she got medical care that the richest person in the world couldn't of dreamed of 40 years ago. things like the patent office and i/p rights are why my mom is alive. trickle down is real and it is wonderful, and the poor have benefited so much from it.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

There is no such thing as a fair tax.

Progressive taxation taxes higher earners at a higher percentage. Not fair to the rich.
A flat tax results in the percent taken being the same but since the poor have have less discretionary income it results in the poor caring a disproportionate share of the burden. Not fair to the poor.
A consumption tax also puts a disproportionate share of the burden on the poor because the poor spend a much larger percentage of their income on consumables than the rich do. Not fair to the poor.

So any form of taxation is going to be unfair. And if it is going to be unfair then I would prefer the additional burden be placed on those best equipped to handle it.

 

[Citizen.Seven]

3 or 4 states would have some difficulty, but the rest have sales tax, which is essentially a percentage of GDP activity within the state. so they already have the capability of reporting income in the state.

Wellll....ok, that I can accept. I'm just not sure if the feds would accept it as being representative of state income. After all, different states have sales tax on different items, so it wouldn't uniformly capture all state activity. But sure, if you can get the 16th repealed, and if you can get a proportional to sales tax allocation among the states as their bill to the feds, then I would support that.

 

[Citizen.Seven]

There is no such thing as a fair tax.

Progressive taxation taxes higher earners at a higher percentage. Not fair to the rich.
A flat tax results in the percent taken being the same but since the poor have have less discretionary income it results in the poor caring a disproportionate share of the burden. Not fair to the poor.
A consumption tax also puts a disproportionate share of the burden on the poor because the poor spend a much larger percentage of their income on consumables than the rich do. Not fair to the poor.

So any form of taxation is going to be unfair. And if it is going to be unfair then I would prefer the additional burden be placed on those best equipped to handle it.

If you consume, you are putting a burden on state resources (police, fire, regulatory structure, etc). Consequently, a tax proportional to consumption such as a sales tax is the fairest, as it is the most directly related to the use of the commons as ruled by the states.

 

[ARealConservative]

There is no such thing as a fair tax.

Progressive taxation taxes higher earners at a higher percentage. Not fair to the rich.
A flat tax results in the percent taken being the same but since the poor have have less discretionary income it results in the poor caring a disproportionate share of the burden. Not fair to the poor.
A consumption tax also puts a disproportionate share of the burden on the poor because the poor spend a much larger percentage of their income on consumables than the rich do. Not fair to the poor.

So any form of taxation is going to be unfair. And if it is going to be unfair then I would prefer the additional burden be placed on those best equipped to handle it.

a consumption tax that only kicks in after the 1st 15k you spend (adjusted for regional price fluctuations) is probably the most fair in terms of how people are using fair.

 

[SocialD]

There is no such thing as a fair tax.

Progressive taxation taxes higher earners at a higher percentage. Not fair to the rich.
A flat tax results in the percent taken being the same but since the poor have have less discretionary income it results in the poor caring a disproportionate share of the burden. Not fair to the poor.
A consumption tax also puts a disproportionate share of the burden on the poor because the poor spend a much larger percentage of their income on consumables than the rich do. Not fair to the poor.

So any form of taxation is going to be unfair. And if it is going to be unfair then I would prefer the additional burden be placed on those best equipped to handle it.

A flat tax with a personal exemption is the most fair. I came up with a version of one that at least to me seems pretty good perhaps I will put it up and see what people think.

 

[blackjack50]

Look how much the rich are suffering! They're getting no new income and can't afford to save anything!

You know, of course someone would say that. But now consider why we are demanding more money from the rich? Is that going to make YOU any more real money? So why would we want to tax the rich anymore? Why don't we try and increase the efficiency rather than size of our government?

 

[ludin]

And not pay one dime on the other $500,000 he makes and does not spend.

so?

he will spend that 500k on something else and will get taxed on it.

 

[iguanaman]

the poor pay very little in taxes, about 3% of all income taxes paid.

the idea of taxes was that they be uniform, and progressive taxes are not.

More blood from stones? I have already stated why taking more money from those that spend all they earn is self-defeating. It should be easy to understand.

 

[iguanaman]

What? Seriously? They do not pay taxes, but get the benefit of the taxes from others. That AIN"T doing their part. Unless you're saying that "their part" is to take from others and spend on themselves? Wow. What a concept of defining "personal responsibility" which is another way of saying "doing their part." How do you know what the wealthy do with their money? Are you wealthy? Do you sit on your money, or do you spend it? Record low rates? The top 55% pay 100% of the taxes. How the hell is that a record low???? The top 10% pays 70.2% - how the hell is that a record low???? The Top 1% pays 38.1% of ALL personal income taxes paid in this country - that's MORE THAN enough for one group to pay.

The bottom 45% need to get the hell out of the wagon and push like the rest of us.

They are already pushing as much as they can. Spending all their income in the economy creates jobs and makes profits for corporations. You want to take those away and give that money to those that don't need it and won't spend it. That is insane
The wealthy are paying record low RATES on their incomes. The amount they pay only illustrates how much income they are making and it is huge.

 

[Morality Games]

45% of Americans pay no federal income tax - MarketWatch
Despite the fact that rich people paying little in the way of income taxes makes plenty of headlines, this is the exception to the rule: The top 1% of taxpayers pay a higher effective income-tax rate than any other group (around 23%, according to a report released by the Tax Policy Center in 2014) — nearly seven times higher than those in the bottom 50%.

On average, those in the bottom 40% of the income spectrum end up getting money from the government. Meanwhile, the richest 20% of Americans, by far, pay the most in income taxes, forking over nearly 87% of all the income tax collected by Uncle Sam.

Rich people pay nearly 87% of all federal individual income tax in America.

Considering they own over half the wealth in the United States and more than half the government I'd say that's a bargain.

 

[Citizen.Seven]

No, thats still not fair, because the more you make, the more you pay, for the same service. Imagine paying for hamburgers that way. A poor person would get it for 1 cent. A rich person would pay $1000. Is that fair, ie. equal?

I agree with you in principle, but I'm operating from the assumption of an income tax existing as per the 16th amendment. I would support a "citizen fee": every citizen pays an equal amount to fund the federal government, or going back to the way it was prior to the 16th amendment, where the feds essentially presented a bill to the states proportional to population. But, accepting the reality of the 16th amendment and the unlikelihood of it being repealed, then a straight no-deduction percentage is the only system that can't be manipulated. Once you have any deductions, or personal exemptions, it cascades to the mess we have today.

 

[iguanaman]

What is wrong with the status quo? As you said, there are both rich and poor now and who said anything about there being a problem with that? Let's tax the rich more and give it the poor. But, if there are still poor then we will need to tax the rich more, and if there are still poor after that we will need to tax the rich even more. Who decides when we tax the rich more? If you are ok with there being rich and poor then why not just leave things the way they are now?

We are keeping the progressive income tax despite all this talk about the "Fair tax". Since every 1st world nation has a progressive tax system it seems stupid to debate its value. It is not going away anytime soon. I have already explained the reasons why it is so effective and even necessary for a consumer based economy. Rates can vary depending on the revenue needed but the principle stays the same. Taxing income not spent at a higher rate provides the fastest growth.

 

[iguanaman]

Oh what nonsense. The point of federal taxation is to pay for the federal government. If you want a bigger spendier federal government, then be willing to pay for it or sit down. This gives you more incentive to vote for lower taxation, since it actually affects you.

I vote for NO taxation then and let the Govt. beg for its money. That's how dumb you sound.

 

[jaeger19]

The average person benefits from cheap fuel costs. They benefit from roads (which is mostly a state thing anyway) Mail is a pay as you go service. You pay for what you use.

Your examples are just odd.

Let’s talk about the programs that are truly costly. How often do you use medicare?


ps - if I am reading this right, the patent office makes money - your fees are pretty high apparently

http://www.uspto.gov/about/stratplan/ar/USPTOFY2014PAR.pdf

Sure the average person benefits from cheap fuel costs.. not as much as a businessman that ships goods all over the country.
They benefit from roads.. but not as much as a person that gets raw materials trucked in from a port 500 miles away.
Mail is not a pay as you go service.. S

My examples are not odd at all.

I don;t use medicare.. I benefit from it as a rich person though since I own medical facilities. And its a LOT more than I pay into FICA

The patent protection includes the judicial services etc that protect you.