Tired of 47% not paying any taxes? Shame on us...

I hear this complaint daily. On talk radio, on Fox, on facebook, etc. The basic message is this:

"The 47% of us who pay no taxes are really getting over on the rest of us that do! It's wrong, it's un-American and somebody should do something about it!"

First off, let's get some specifics...

Its hard to think of a person in the US who's over 18 and doesn't pay some kind of taxes. Our income is taxed, we contribute to Social Security and Medicare. We pay sales taxes in most states. We pay taxes on gasoline, cigarettes, alcohol, etc. Homeowners pay property taxes. Residents of many local communities pay school taxes. And on and on. To be fair, the vast, vast, vast majority of us pay some taxes. The complaint I mentioned above is most commonly, in my opinion, applied to those who don't pay Federal Income taxes. Its also fair to say that the revenues that come from those "other" taxes like gasoline, cigarettes, property, school taxes, etc. don't go directly to the US Treasury Department.

Let's even agree that some percent of the 47% who allegedly pay "no taxes" may be breaking the law for tax evasion. To that rather small group...

Please click here to continue...

 

Is this any less disgusting that the LW politicians, media, and posters saying the rich are destroying the country?

Both sides have established talking points with no middle ground. Why?

 

Thanks for reading...

Not sure if you're cherry picky or just missed it but 7 sentences after you finished your cut/paste job, this sentence appeared:

"The Liberal media plays its own version of this game, just not nearly as well. All people that are wealthy aren't selfish pigs. Its brutal from either side."

Maybe you just missed it...

 

The rightwing meme is the typical big lie. Income distribution has neven been worse, so the **********s claim that poor people don't pay enough taxes.

It's like saying please pass the ketsup I want to fly a kite.

Conservatism is morally bankrupt as this issue shows. Their vision of America is a third world country with high taxes on the poor and no taxes on Paris Hilton. Bizarre.

 

Nothing is too expensive for the person who doesn't have to pay for it.

And the nitwit in the White House chose April 15th to demand that the 53% who pay income tax should thank him.

I tend to agree with the senator, I forget who it was, who said the people pulling the wagon were getting tired of hearing the people riding in the wagon that they aren't pulling fast enough.

 

I'm sorry. It's those nasty people paying taxes, especially income tax. The people who pay no taxes or almost no taxes are riding.

I didn't think that was a difficult concept.

 

Fair enough. You pay for the services you use. In fact I think it is better that marginal income tax rate is vastly reduced to 25% with only the top 10% paying for it. We could collect tax tavenue through such such means. The problem in politics is that the none-income tax paying population is almost a political majority.

 

Great. Now I have to work even harder to help make up the difference.

 

47% of us don't pay income taxes!

I'm angry that our economy is so screwed up that 47% of us can't make enough money to afford to pay a federal income tax.

Why aren't folks complaining about our grossly unequal distribution of income instead of dumping on the victims?

 

Right, dist of income or dist of wealth. Not exactly the same, but close:

United States, 1983-2007
Total Net Worth
Top 1 percent Next 19 percent Bottom 80 percent

1983 33.8% 47.5% 18.7%
1989 37.4% 46.2% 16.5%
1992 37.2% 46.6% 16.2%
1995 38.5% 45.4% 16.1%
1998 38.1% 45.3% 16.6%
2001 33.4% 51.0% 15.6%
2004 34.3% 50.3% 15.3%
2007 34.6% 50.5% 15.0%


And if we look at financial wealth....


Financial Wealth
Top 1 percent Next 19 percent Bottom 80 percent
1983 42.9% 48.4% 8.7%
1989 46.9% 46.5% 6.6%
1992 45.6% 46.7% 7.7%
1995 47.2% 45.9% 7.0%
1998 47.3% 43.6% 9.1%
2001 39.7% 51.5% 8.7%
2004 42.2% 50.3% 7.5%
2007 42.7% 50.3% 7.0%


But some say teh bottom 47% need to pay taxes, huh? Well, truthfully teh bottom 50% pays 3% of all taxes, very little, but that could be due to teh wealth being all at the top, a fact RWers seem to ignore.

 

There is milions of children who don't pay taxes. To make things more fair maybe we should tax their lunch money.

 

Considering that they make 0 income, we can charge them a 99% tax rate and they will still not pay taxes.

They do already pay taxes on the baseball cards and bubble gum that they buy.

 

They have lunch money, we could collect sales tax at the school cafeteria.

 

No, our vision is of a 1st world nation that places the burden of federal taxation on every working person in the country. I don't care if the tax burden on the poor is only 10 cents, but they should pay something.

 

Or better yet, if the gov increases the top margin tax brkt, that will force the rich to reinvest their profits, therefore employing the poor w/o further gov intervention.

 

Their parents pay. You are not my child. And it isn't your income that decides whether or not you pay income tax. It's "taxable" income. That's why John and Theresa Kerry pay a lower percentage in income tax than I do. That's why a woman getting $6,000 a month in child support may pay no income tax. That's why free housing, free food, free medical, and cash welfare payments don't count as income. Just think you buy food, pay for health insurance, pay for housing, all with after tax dollars, assuming you pay income tax. What if you got to deduct all of that?

 

No, the children pay for their lunch with money given to them by their parents. When parents give money to their children it becomes the children's money, their personal income. Since all personal income needs to be taxed we should not exclude children's lunch money.

OK then, poor people have no taxable income and so are not income taxable, just like the children with their lunch money.

If all people have to pay some minimum income tax it would be inconsistent to exclude children who gain income from their parents. Even if it is just children's lunch money that is excluded the argument that all must pay some income tax begins to slide down the slippery slope of arbitrary reasoning.

How do you know I don't?
If I am incorporated I can deduct all my "business" expenses. Since my business is living I can deduct all my living expenses.

 

That is not income. That is a gift. The two items are different and are considered differently under tax code.

If the parents gave their child over $13,000 for lunch, it would be taxable by the IRS and the child would be responsible to pay taxes for the amount over that $13,000 limit.

Interestingly, usually it is the liberals who are pushing for children to have to pay taxes on the gifts their parents give them, especially posthumously. Most conservatives do want everyone to pay a share of income tax, but don't advocate for a gift tax.

 

I'm delighted Unrealist lives up to his name. I certainly hope Unrealists notes the income when someone pays for his lunch. Otherwise like a lot of liberals, he'd be cheating on his taxes, wouldn't he?

 

And I thought the precept of this thread was to change the tax code so that those who pay no income tax should pay something. Certainly changes in the taxation of gifts are in order if there is to be a fair application of such a proposal.

Taxing gifts and inheritance would be fair, after all they are income and should be taxed like any other income. Most conservatives have a very skewed idea of what is fair, seeking to exempt multi-million dollar inheritances while increasing taxes on the poor because they "pay no tax on their income".

No one pays for my lunch but me.

Even so, I have no problem with paying my taxes, it is an inherent part of the deal with living where I do. If I had an objection to paying the taxes I would simply move elsewhere. It continually amuses me that so many people object to their taxes but instead of doing something about it, like moving to a place with lower taxes, they just subject everyone else to their "I don't want to pay any taxes" ranting.

Taxes pay for important things like roads and police and schools and stuff. If you believe that you are not getting your money's worth from your taxes you can vote, either at the ballot box or with your feet.

 

Maybe the tax rate should be based on the benefits one gets from government.

By this standard the rich would pay a lot more and the poor would get money back.

Our bloated defense budget is entirely for the benefit of the "haves". The poor just do the dying.

The poor should also get educational benefits from the government to make up for their horrible schools.

How about compensation for the children of the poverty stricken deceased to make up for the free gift of cash that the children of the deceased rich receive, tax free?

If we are going to support a system that maintains a pool of dependent poor we should be up front about it.