HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF 14%

[jonny5]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

So you have no problem with private enterprise essentially being paid thru driver licence and registration fees, which of course would necessitate a substantial increase in those costs, to cover the private corporations costs and their profit. Imagine private enterprise mandating public fees. I can imagine a state like montana attempting to pay for their interstate highways thru license/registration fees - where they might have 300 or 400K drivers.

If a new road needs to be build, and the best path is thru private property and the owner of that property wants an unrealistic way over the top market price, then you can bet it will be expropriated on behalf of private enterprise.

I think there area a number of emminent domain cases on the east coast where in one instance a homeowner "lost" his house to a casino in NJ. Something tells me a road is way more important that a casino.

That would be illegal.

 

[jonny5]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

I don't see how I would benefit from a flat tax--but I do see how cutting their tax will cut what they owe...
In addition, why cut beneficial programs like what the Republicans usually go after just to have a flat tax? I guess I'm biased because I saw education cut by Walker and it has had an impact....

You would benefit through savings on tax preparation, lower effective rates, and cost of govt as far less bureaucracy would be needed. It would also encourage economic growth, resulting in more jobs, wealth, and tax revenue to reduce the deficit. We cut "beneficial" programs because we cant afford them and they are inefficient when run by the federal govt.

 

[JRog]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

Romney only claims about 1/2 his charitable contributions in order to maintain that tax rate. He could have paid less tax had he claimed all of them.

He still could. If he loses the presidential race, there's nothing stopping him from filing amended returns and reclaiming those contributions.

 

[washunut]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

well the obama campaign is claiming that its not fair that someone making 50K a year is paying a higher effective FIT rate than Romney

Guess what

ITS A LIE.

Answer to the thread question is ZERO. Only the financially illiterate would think that is close to true. Problem is the number of financially illiterate people in this nation probably north of 50%.

 

[H. Lee White]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

Like its a choice to breath. Let's no play semantic games. In reality many of those choices are not reversable.

They are. Absolutely. Nothig necessitates their existence and so nothing prevebnts their repeal other than the will to do so.
Not having the will to end spending on certain things in no way equates to haveing in invoilable obligatiobn to spend on those certain things.

Yes, but that isn't about to happen in the forseeable future.

In your humble opinion.
Every day that nothing is done, it gets closer. At some point. nothing can stop it. At THAT point, the issues you describe will look rather mild.

Of course. there never has been a "sound" economy.

Then we agree. Excellent.
The best way to move towards a sound economy is to reduce its dependence on government spending - best done by cutting that spending.

Perhaps its time to spruce up that reading comprehension or return from that alternate reality, I have responded specifically to what you said.

-Now- you have, if only marginally. Previously you offered nothing of substance.

 

[Jonsa]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

Yes, exactly. Democracy is theft. Restore the Constitutional Republic! Elect the Conservative Right.

Will he go round in circles? uh huh.

 

[Jonsa]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

That would be illegal.

Not according to SCOTUS.

Court rules cities can seize homes

"A sharply divided Supreme Court yesterday granted local governments wide latitude to condemn and knock down homes and businesses against the will of the owners in order to foster new private economic development.

The court's 5-4 decision in a case involving New London, Conn., dealt a blow to property rights advocates nationwide, giving localities broad discretion to promote privately backed renewal and gentrification projects as long as they have a "public purpose."

The four dissenting justices warned the effect of the ruling will be to favor the interests of the wealthy and powerful over those with less influence.

For New Jersey, the ruling eliminates a potential legal impediment to plans under way in some 55 municipalities that in the past two years have sought the authority to condemn and clear private property, in part for new private development......"

 

[Jonsa]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

that is a moronic assumption but sadly is common among the envious left.

the corollary of which is the greedy rights assumption that people utilizing social services are all lazy irresponsible moochers.
;-)

 

[Jonsa]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

They are. Absolutely. Nothig necessitates their existence and so nothing prevebnts their repeal other than the will to do so.
Not having the will to end spending on certain things in no way equates to haveing in invoilable obligatiobn to spend on those certain things.

Totally wrong. Government operations, international trade and commerce, federal investments, defence are all necessities, that require the giving of commitments - inviolate commitments wrt international trade and commerce for instance. To suggest otherwise is to not have a clue about the way the world works and last time I checked despite being top dog, the US is part of our world.

AS to selection of things to not spend money on, I agree there's tons of discretionary items that are choices and can be terminated at any time by the government.


here;s how the CBO views it.
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/BS_Discretionary_print.pdf

In your humble opinion.
Every day that nothing is done, it gets closer. At some point. nothing can stop it. At THAT point, the issues you describe will look rather mild.

Not just in my humble opinion. Or are you suggesting that the American people who elect their government are so blind as to allow that to happen to them, because they don't want to stop spending? this is a ridiculous notion. the american people have risen to challenges and threats of such import since their inception, and have always prevailed (more or less). Why is your generation the one to bring it all down?

Then we agree. Excellent.
The best way to move towards a sound economy is to reduce its dependence on government spending - best done by cutting that spending.

Or grow the economy and keep spending levels in actual amounts the same over a period of time. that is a way way better method than simply taking out an ax and indisriminatly chopping. I believe a balanced and rational approach to solving the issue of the debt burden is the appropriate and superior method of handling the problem.

-Now- you have, if only marginally. Previously you offered nothing of substance.

whatever.

 

[jonny5]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

Not according to SCOTUS.

Court rules cities can seize homes

"A sharply divided Supreme Court yesterday granted local governments wide latitude to condemn and knock down homes and businesses against the will of the owners in order to foster new private economic development.

The court's 5-4 decision in a case involving New London, Conn., dealt a blow to property rights advocates nationwide, giving localities broad discretion to promote privately backed renewal and gentrification projects as long as they have a "public purpose."

The four dissenting justices warned the effect of the ruling will be to favor the interests of the wealthy and powerful over those with less influence.

For New Jersey, the ruling eliminates a potential legal impediment to plans under way in some 55 municipalities that in the past two years have sought the authority to condemn and clear private property, in part for new private development......"

SCOTUS is wrong. Unless your willing to say that every ruling they have ever made is right, Citizens United, for example?

 

[Jonsa]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

SCOTUS is wrong. Unless your willing to say that every ruling they have ever made is right, Citizens United, for example?

According to the constitution, SCOTUS is the last word.
Whether you agree or not with those decisions, only SCOTUS has the power to reverse one of their decisions.

Personally I think it stinks, but unfortunately that has zero effect on the situation.

 

[Bobcat]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

In answer to the OP----None, they are all paying less.

 

[jonny5]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

According to the constitution, SCOTUS is the last word.
Whether you agree or not with those decisions, only SCOTUS has the power to reverse one of their decisions.

Personally I think it stinks, but unfortunately that has zero effect on the situation.

Thats not what I asked. Can the SCOTUS be wrong?

 

[Jonsa]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

Thats not what I asked. Can the SCOTUS be wrong?

Of course I can think they are wrong, but as a layman, I do not understand all of the case law and constitutional interpretations that go into a SCOTUS decision.

I do think citizens united is a terrible decision from a moral and consequential perspective, but that is immaterial as to whether its wrong from a legal standpoint. And I do believe that is what a SCOTUS decision is all about.

 

[Bobcat]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

Thats not what I asked. Can the SCOTUS be wrong?

By definition---No. Decisions of SCOTUS are constitutional. They are the final appeal. You may disagree, or I may disagree. But their decisions are binding on all of us-----------Oh, except obama that is.

 

[Mr.Nick]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

well the obama campaign is claiming that its not fair that someone making 50K a year is paying a higher effective FIT rate than Romney

Guess what

ITS A LIE.

Not many do....

The only individuals who could possibly pay such a percentage are those who are single with no dependents. Even then those individuals have deductions and such.

The rich (6 figures) generally pay most of the taxes (as far as income)...

 

[jonny5]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

Of course I can think they are wrong, but as a layman, I do not understand all of the case law and constitutional interpretations that go into a SCOTUS decision.

I do think citizens united is a terrible decision from a moral and consequential perspective, but that is immaterial as to whether its wrong from a legal standpoint. And I do believe that is what a SCOTUS decision is all about.

Then similarly I can think they are wrong about eminent domain.

 

[Aimee30]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

You would benefit through savings on tax preparation, lower effective rates, and cost of govt as far less bureaucracy would be needed. It would also encourage economic growth, resulting in more jobs, wealth, and tax revenue to reduce the deficit. We cut "beneficial" programs because we cant afford them and they are inefficient when run by the federal govt.

I still think that we can afford more if we leave the tax rate alone. The states should have more power but I don't see how they can take care of their citizens without raising taxes if the government cuts their rate. So it seems more like it would be up to a state governor whether the people who are in poverty stay uncared for or not. Leaving people to fend for themselves and try to make it in the world seems to be the same as shortening their lives to me. That's why I go with the view pro-life needs to include everyone's life not just babies. I really don't trust my governor at all to do a good job taking care of everyone--he's been funded by out of state wealthy people who influence his interests.
As far as affordability goes, we have the pending doom of becoming more like a third world nation--extremely wealthy and then impoverished people begging or doing crime to get their food. The wealthy should understand in my opinion that if you don't want crime to increase you need to make sure everyone has what they need. Plus, churches can't afford to take care of all poverty victims. The only get so many donations and I believe the people who don't want to pay more taxes are also the ones who likely don't donate to the church either. So I guess looking at the situation, I see greed as the major deciding factor in how much taxes or donations people make. All I can say is I will still scoff at people going on luxury cruises , buying a new boat, having more than one home, and buying up all the luxury items as in my opinion they only care about themselves.

 

[head of joaquin]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

So now conservatives are against the earned income credit, which was a conservative think tank idea passed by Reagan.

More evidence of the intellectual bankruptcy of conservatism.

 

[jonny5]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

So now conservatives are against the earned income credit, which was a conservative think tank idea passed by Reagan.

More evidence of the intellectual bankruptcy of conservatism.

Or evolution.

 

[jonny5]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

I still think that we can afford more if we leave the tax rate alone. The states should have more power but I don't see how they can take care of their citizens without raising taxes if the government cuts their rate. So it seems more like it would be up to a state governor whether the people who are in poverty stay uncared for or not. Leaving people to fend for themselves and try to make it in the world seems to be the same as shortening their lives to me. That's why I go with the view pro-life needs to include everyone's life not just babies. I really don't trust my governor at all to do a good job taking care of everyone--he's been funded by out of state wealthy people who influence his interests.
As far as affordability goes, we have the pending doom of becoming more like a third world nation--extremely wealthy and then impoverished people begging or doing crime to get their food. The wealthy should understand in my opinion that if you don't want crime to increase you need to make sure everyone has what they need. Plus, churches can't afford to take care of all poverty victims. The only get so many donations and I believe the people who don't want to pay more taxes are also the ones who likely don't donate to the church either. So I guess looking at the situation, I see greed as the major deciding factor in how much taxes or donations people make. All I can say is I will still scoff at people going on luxury cruises , buying a new boat, having more than one home, and buying up all the luxury items as in my opinion they only care about themselves.

The idea is to have local solutions to local problems. My city can care for my cities needs better than your city. Instead DC is taking my paycheck, paying some bureaucrats to do paperwork, and then writing a check to my neighbor, who theyve never met.

 

[drz-400]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

No, you're not. Please tell me what numbers you used to arrive at that faulty conclusion. (Line #'s by name -- don't need the amounts.)

Alright, bringing up a dead thread, but I remembered this conversation from a long time ago. Just did my taxes at HR Block.

AGI: $86275, took the standard deduction of $6100 and got a $3900 exemption (not sure what it is for but line 42 said i could). Taxable income was $76275. Federal income taxes owed, $14951.Tax rate of 17.3%. Romney can suck my hog.

 

[Lutherf]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

Alright, bringing up a dead thread, but I remembered this conversation from a long time ago. Just did my taxes at HR Block.

AGI: $86275, took the standard deduction of $6100 and got a $3900 exemption (not sure what it is for but line 42 said i could). Taxable income was $76275. Federal income taxes owed, $14951.Tax rate of 17.3%. Romney can suck my hog.

The good news is that you saved roughly $50 because some of your income was LTCG.

 

[drz-400]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

The good news is that you saved roughly $50 because some of your income was LTCG.

Wooohoo, that gets me excited.

 

[Lutherf]

Re: HOw many people making 50K a year are paying an EFFECTIVE FED INCOME TAX RATE OF

Wooohoo, that gets me excited.

It should.

If you spent a little time figuring out how to do more of that or using other strategies to maximize your tax savings the savings could be thousands instead of tens of dollars.

It's funny but it seems that a lot of people have a door opened for them but choose to kick it closed.