- Joined
- Dec 14, 2005
- Messages
- 1,704
- Reaction score
- 10
- Location
- New Hampshire
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
ptsdkid said:Seeing how 99.94% of Americans are not rich, I was wondering how giving tax cuts to the rich would affect or hurt you in your everyday life.
hipsterdufus said:The number of "rich" people in America that pay no taxes has been increasing exponentially the past five years.
Comrade Brian said:The thing is, is that tax-cuts, usually end up in social program cuts. This in effect affects many people.
Stinger said:Really, and the proof of this? And how do they not pay any taxes at all?
This is a lie, dissemintaed by the DNC.The number of "rich" people in America that pay no taxes has been increasing exponentially the past five years. At the same time, we're seeing the same thing with corporations.
Interesting.What fools Joe Beer Can is that you may get a few crumbs that fall off the table in terms of a tax break - but you make up for it two fold in other areas that most people don't think are related - higher paytroll taxes, higher property taxes etc.
Yer right.The other part of the equation is this. We are at war and have an 8 trillion dollar deficit. Spending like a drunken sailor, while asking no sacrifice of the average American is unheard of in a time of war.
hipsterdufus said:Look it up if you're curious. It's a fact.
M14 Shooter said:Really.
After the 1961 tax cuts, did social spending go up or down?
After the 1982 tax cuts, did social spendng go up or down?
After the 2001/2003 tax cuts, did social spending fo up or down?
You get one guess.
M14 Shooter said:Generally, its up to the person that made the claim to support it.
The number of affluent individuals and married couples who paid no federal income taxes jumped more than 15 percent in 2002, to 5,650, government data released last week showed.
The chances of having a large income but not paying taxes on any of it are growing, according to the data, issued in the Internal Revenue Service's annual report to Congress on well-to-do Americans who live tax free.
About one in every 436 high-income Americans paid no taxes in 2002, up from one in 531 in 2001 and one in 1,010 in 2000.
Comrade Brian said:?????
2001 and 2003? Programs were cut, with an increase in military spending.
Don't know about '61 and '82, nor do I care. Those were a while ago.
hipsterdufus said:Fair enough:
Here's some data from the IRS in 2002 stated in the following article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/03/business/03tax.html?ex=1137906000&en=3bb978af4229a56a&ei=5070
Comrade Brian said:Because, when the income to the govt. falls, they don't want to spend more, and thus social spending.
M14 Shooter said:Social spendng has gone up every year since 1955, regardless of revenue increases or decreases.
You're trying to argue that when revenue goes down, social spending goes down, but there's absolutely no support for your argument.
M14 Shooter said:You said:
The number of "rich" people in America that pay no taxes has been increasing exponentially the past five years.
A 15% gain in one year is "exponential over the last 5 years"?
Comrade Brian said:As time goes on, money becomes less valueable. E.g. a dollar 50 yrs. ago would have bought you a lot more than it would today. So in a sense the numbers may seem bigger, but in effect, they are smaller. Also I think you may have counted military spending !s social spending too. Governments often act like businesses.
Busta said:The Top 50% pay 96.54% of All Income Taxes
The Top 1% Pay More Than a Third: 34.27%
Source: (1) (2)
As a poor man (under 25K per year), I don't have a problem with giving the rich people a brake. After all, if the rich have more money to buy lavish homes, then that translates into job security for me.
hipsterdufus said:You said the fact that more rich people paying no taxes was a lie by the left. I show you some of the facts and you ignore them.
M14 Shooter said:OK. But...
-Your claim that the number is increasing exponetially is wrong;
-You cannot show that the number of 'rich' people paying no taxes increased as a function of the tax cuts. Tax situations change all the time, and a wealthy person's taxes going up/down often has little to do with the actual tax rates.
M14 Shooter said:After EACH of those tax cuts, social spending went up.
1960: $26.1B
1968: $59.4B (+127%)
1980: $313.3B
1988: $533.4B (+70%)
2001: $1115B
2004: $1475B (+32%)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2004/pdf/hist.pdf
So, what basis is there for the arguments that after tax cuts, social spending goes down?
Mikkel said:1960's- Vietnam war
1980's- Reagan Arms race
2001-2003- Iraq War
The true sign of Republican leadership these days, lower taxes, yet a higher price for freedom.
Your statistics hurt conservatives about as much as they do liberals. All of those Republicans who call for balanced budgets in this instance are hypocrites for doing the exact opposite- lowering taxes and increasing spending.
ptsdkid said:Seeing how 99.94% of Americans are not rich,
ptsdkid said:I was wondering how giving tax cuts to the rich would affect or hurt you in your everyday life.
hipsterdufus said:"Exponentially" was the wrong word to use. I should have said "significantly increased"
About one in every 436 high-income Americans paid no taxes in 2002, up from one in 531 in 2001 and one in 1,010 in 2000.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?