Forum Post: Income Taxes
Posted 13 years ago on Nov. 23, 2011, 6:26 a.m. EST by leoneo
(76)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
the lower 50% of the population pays 3% of the income tax in our country. The top 1% of the population pays 37% of the income tax. The top 10% of the population pays 68% of the income taxes. The treasury department report also shows that the top 10% of the population pays more taxes under the Bush tax cuts. Only 30% of the population pays taxes at all.
Wana fix the problem, close the loopholes in the tax code and make the other 70% of the population start paying taxes.
If you're referring to the PERCENTAGE of OVERALL FEDERAL INCOME taxes paid by any particular group, it's a terribly misleading statistic. The rich pay a larger PERCENTAGE of OVERALL FEDERAL INCOME taxes now than 10 years ago because they have a larger PERCENTAGE of INCOME now than 10 years ago. That statistic you refer to is one of the most misleading in the history of propaganda.
When you account for all FEDERAL, STATE, and LOCAL taxes and fees, the middle class actually pay about the same rate (as a percentage of income) as the rich. So stop being so shallow. Look at all angles of the equation. Otherwise, go play.
When you're finished in the sandbox, read this:
Corporate profits have been partially subsidized with federal, state, and local revenue. This benefit has been hoarded at the top. Business managers make up the largest group of one percent club pigs. Plus 40% of the market is owned by the top 1%. Their record territory dividends have been partially subsidized by federal, state, and local revenue. The benefits have not been shared proportionally with the little guy. The lopsided division of growth across quintiles proves it. The highest percentile has grown more than 10 times faster than the middle percentile over the last 30 years. This is true EVEN AFTER taxes. When you account for inflation and the actual cost of living (tied to record high profits in energy, finance, and healthcare), the middle class have actually lost relative buying power while the top 1% have drastically increased their income and bottom line wealth. In 1976 (when their taxes were much higher), the top one percent reaped 9 percent of all private income and held less than 20 percent of all private wealth in America. Now, they reap 21 percent of all private income and hold 40 percent of all private wealth. Meanwhile, the lower majority (those who are still employed) are working more hours and have less to show for it. Also, small business creates more jobs dollar for dollar and shares more revenue with the little guy than big business. And god damn it. When I threw out the figure of $250,000, I was referring to personal income. Not business revenue.
Just to make it crystal clear: The rich do not pay 37% of all taxes. They pay roughly 37% of all FEDERAL INCOME TAXES which account for less than 1/2 of total government revenue. The rest is drawn from a number of sources and across income levels. The rich harp on this 'Federal Income Tax' statistic because it leads people to believe that they pay 37% of ALL taxes. They don't. Their share as a group represents their share of income. Duh.
If the rich want to pay a lower share of taxes, then they should get themselves a lower share of income.
RAISE THOSE GOD DAMN TAXES ON THE RICH!
Modest, you are right for calling-out "neo" for his half-truths and misinformation.
The nation needs to have a full and complete and honest dialogue about income taxes.
How has wealth and income grown for the top 1% and the middle class and the poor over the past 50 years?
How have Tax Rates -- which are different than Taxes Paid -- changed over the past 50 years?
How have the changes in taxes affected the well-being and wealth of each segment of society over the last 50 years?
How progressive or regressive should our tax system be?
What are the pros and cons of returning to the tax laws and tax rates of 50 years ago when the top marginal tax rate was about 90%?
How much did the tax cuts for the rich really "trickle down" to the middle class and the poor like they were advertised?
What are the pros and cons of eliminating the capital-gain tax rates and treating it like ordinary income, so billionaire hedge-fund managers don't pay 15% because of the nature of their income, while office custodians and clerks pay up to twice that rate?
How can we start a real national dialogue on income taxes, tax rates, and so forth when the members of Congress for the most part are members of, or financed by, the 1%?
If we have that dialogue, you have my nomination for mediator.