dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
875
share rss forum feed

WhatNow
Premium
join:2009-05-06
Charlotte, NC
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable

1 recommendation

Rich people buy election

The crowd that paid for most of the nasty educational ads are the same group that make hundreds of millions of dollars but pay a less of a percentage in tax then the average Joe.

Grover Norgquist bothered me 3 times in the last 2 days. Funny how they can find an unpublished number on their robo dialers. Maybe I could sue them for mental distress.


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
said by WhatNow:

The crowd that paid for most of the nasty educational ads are the same group that make hundreds of millions of dollars but pay a less of a percentage in tax then the average Joe.
Sorry but this is simply not true.

»www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/04in06tr.xls

According to the IRS, as of 2004 the top 50% of wage earners pay 96.7% of all federal income tax (line 129).

I am sure there are some rich people who are able to escape paying significant amounts of tax, but by and large, it is the "rich" who pay the bills in this country.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.

bngdup

join:2007-02-20
Old Bridge, NJ
You responded to the wrong statement. He meant that the people in the top tax bracket typically pay a lower percentage of their income than the "average joe". The point being that they are so rich that even with paying a lower percentage of their income they pay 96.7% of the countries taxes.

Also, they account for 90+ % of the nation's wealth so of course they would pay for most of the nation's taxes. Pretty simple logic.

And please spare me the "rich" victimization line about paying the bills. Are you suggesting that the middle/lower class who will most likely have to work into their 70s pay the country's bills instead? Not the guy who owns the state-subsidized football stadium, no that guy has clearly already paid his dues.


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
said by bngdup:

And please spare me the "rich" victimization line about paying the bills. Are you suggesting that the middle/lower class who will most likely have to work into their 70s pay the country's bills instead?
Actually yes. I believe that all people should have to pay something in taxes. Personally, I prefer a national retail sales tax that exempts certain "essential" purchaes, much like most state sales taxes do already.

Perhaps if everyone paid something, then they would be more likely to support restraints on government spending, i.e., lower the bill.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.

rahvin112

join:2002-05-24
Sandy, UT
If currently a certain group pay 50% of the taxes the only way to lower taxes on them is to raise it on the other 50% unless you want to increase the deficit. Every single Flat Tax plan is a plan that will raise taxes on the lower middle class and the poor without exception. Anyone that can't admit that is the reality of the situation is a liar, some lie to themselves about it but the vast majority that preach these flat tax plans are not honest about its intent. That intent is to raise taxes on the poor to cover tax cuts on the rich.


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
said by rahvin112:

If currently a certain group pay 50% of the taxes the only way to lower taxes on them is to raise it on the other 50% unless you want to increase the deficit.
Cutting spending is also an option. Since most of the people who benefit from increased spending tend to fall into the 50% who pay only 3% of the total tax collected, they tend to vote for candidates who support more wealth transfers from the top 50% to their own pockets. Requiring these people to kick in more money, especially if it hurts everyone equally (i.e. a flat income tax or national retail sales tax) will get them to think twice about such things.
said by rahvin112:

Every single Flat Tax plan is a plan that will raise taxes on the lower middle class and the poor without exception.
And why not? Stuff costs money.
said by rahvin112:

That intent is to raise taxes on the poor to cover tax cuts on the rich.
Well if you look at the IRS data I linked, you can conclude that raising taxes on the poor would not help the rich very much, since those people clearly pay little to nothing in total taxes collected.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.

bngdup

join:2007-02-20
Old Bridge, NJ
said by pnh102:

And why not? Stuff costs money.

Yes, stuff like War(s) and tax cuts for the rich cost money. If you taxed the middle class at 98% it still would not dent what it cost to run constant Wars that Republicans write about in their Memoirs.


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
said by bngdup:

Yes, stuff like War(s) and tax cuts for the rich cost money.
Or failed stimulus programs, which are costing far more than the Iraq War.

But if you feel the government needs more money, why don't you cut it a check?
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.

rahvin112

join:2002-05-24
Sandy, UT
said by pnh102:

Or failed stimulus programs, which are costing far more than the Iraq War.
Complete fabrication (originated by Fox News of Course). You can't even get to the cost of the war if you add in TARP, which wasn't stimulus and which was passed by the republican congress and republican president.

The cost of IRAQ is frequently misrepresented by only accounting for combat pay or expenditures to cover actual combat (around 800+ billion at the end of combat operations). Most of the time these estimates fail to take into account simple items such as mercenaries (or private military contractors as they are frequently mislabeled). And the biggest deceit of all? Lying about the long term medical care the millions of veterans will extract from the taxpayers during their lifetime (Trillions of dollars alone). That the entire war and the after expenses will be financed on interest paid to China is another issue frequently not mentioned. When all these costs are factored in the Iraq war will cost in excess of 6 billion with billions of those dollars being Interest we pay China. It's an atrocious misrepresentation to the American public to equate this to the misguided, but necessary stimulus.

Now I didn't approve of the stimulus, I know why they did it and understand that if they didn't do something that the entire economy likely would have been permanently damaged for decades but I still don't approve of what was specifically done or how it was accomplished. But at least the Stimulus was necessary to prevent a second great Depression. The Iraq war was NOT necessary. It was a waste of money, resources and most importantly, blood and the American people will bear the costs of this war for the remainder of the lives of every citizen currently alive including those just born.

»www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co···200.html

said by pnh102:

But if you feel the government needs more money, why don't you cut it a check?
I pay the government a very large percentage of my income every single pay check. Anyone that thinks the Iraq war was justified should be the ones cutting checks to pay the many trillions it will ultimately cost.

bngdup

join:2007-02-20
Old Bridge, NJ
reply to pnh102
I'm not fighting the concept of fiscal responsibility. I just don't believe that the Republicans will do anything different then in the past.

They'll get elected, realize that they can't cut Medicare or Military spending and they'll just pander to the religious zealots by trying to enforce "Gods Will" by creating laws and policies based on their particular interpretation of the bible which could mean anything from more Wars to additional morality police in the FCC


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
reply to rahvin112
said by rahvin112:

Complete fabrication (originated by Fox News of Course).
Ahhh. So just saying "FOX News" means it is false. I can say your news sources are false too just because I don't like them, even though the facts speak for themselves.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.