- Joined
- Jan 26, 2010
- Messages
- 39,629
- Reaction score
- 23,090
- Location
- arizona
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Well if you were to believe that everyone should pay the same % of income tax, then you would be supporting the wealthier paying in more taxes.
Why do you feel the wealthy should pay the more taxes?
Your likely response is that as long as everyone is paying the same percentage then it is fair. Which means you support the wealthy paying more total dollars in taxes and consider this to be fair.
While you are headed in the right direction, I do not believe you have a complete understanding of what fair means.
I will demonstrate what I am talking about as so many seem to be lost on the point.
Lets look at a low income individual or family:
Lets assume the lowest figures for living expenses are, on average, as follows:
Rent = $600/mo, $7,200/yr
Food = $200/mo, $2,400/yr
Total of $9,600 per year (this is a very low estimate and only includes food and shelter)
Lets assume that the lowest figures for income is as follows:
$5/hr at 35 hours per week = $175/wk = 9,100 per year (this is also a low estimate and assumes that the individual or family has a job for a whole year)
Now lets apply a tax rate of 15% (also a low percentage considering that everyone is at the same tax rate) and we have a net income of $7,735
Now if we deduct expenses we have a total loss of: $1,865 per year (that's -24% of their net income)
Now lets look at a wealthy individual or household:
Again, lets assume the lowest figures for living expenses are, on average, as follows:
Rent = $600/mo, $7,200/yr
Food = $200/mo, $2,400/yr
Total of $9,600 per year (this is a very low estimate and only includes food and shelter)
Lets assume that the figures for income is as follows:
$1,000,000 per year
Now lets apply a tax rate of 15% (also a low percentage considering that everyone is at the same tax rate) and we have a net income of $850,000
Now if we deduct expenses we have a total surplus of: $840,400 per year (99% of their net income)
Here we see that relative to living expenses, this individual or household still maintains close to 100% of their net income (after income tax and living expenses), while the lowest income family or individual was actually not able to pay their living expense and went into a debt of 24% of their net income (after income tax and living expenses).
So who is actually being hurt more here by a flat tax, the low income household or the high income household? Somehow I do not even see turnip juice being sucked out of the low income individual or family ... I dunno maybe I'm missing something ? ? ? How would everyone benefit from this scenario again? ? ? If the low income family is not able to live, there is no-one to do the richy's dirty work.
such a flat tax would be clearly unfair; a fair tax would be better based on how one's income compares to the lowest average living expenses .. any other way is tyranny (I believe this is why 46% of our country does not pay income tax ... there's nothing to tax! Anyone can see this.) Explain to me how this is not fair again? It never ceases to amaze me when people miss this obvious point. It boggles my mind when people think that a flat tax is somehow fair ... wow .... really? ... wow ...
Good grief. Ok average low income based on where?. San Fran or backwater Alabama? Way to much difference in cost of living througout the US. It boggles my mind that people expect something for nothing. I was mearly giving my opinion on why the middle class pays so much in taxes. One of the reasons is 46% pay no federal income tax. I never stated what the percentage should be on a flat tax. Heck I can be happy with the way things are. So many are saying the rich does not pay enough. I say they pay within the rules that exists. You care to give your thoughts on the orginal OP or just throw rocks.
Last edited: