Do the Rich Pay Their Fair Share?

[USDA#1]

ok, 'cos for a minute I thought we were going for the 1st post in the new SN Comedy Forum.

 

[IndySteel]

Funny, this thread too has commies who think they understand economics.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

We're not talking about GIVING it to anyone. Income tax is about how much the government confiscates from it's citizens. Liberals love taxes because it punishes certain people while giving away other people's money to their buddies... Solyndra anyone? Green energy anyone? Big dig anyone? Unions?

Quit being racist and hating on FBP.

 

[Steeltime]

So if the 1% are paying 50%, how was Romney paying less than 15%? Is Romney that much smarter than the other 1%ers?

First, the top 1% pay about 37% of the annual income tax revenues, not 50%.

Second, the data are from the IRS. Please try and discuss the facts, not your unfounded belief that the rich don't pay their "fair share" (whatever that is supposed to mean). The charts and graphs are based on tax revenue reports from the IRS and show the following:

These are not somebody's opinions, or beliefs, or arguments - these are the facts.

How does GE pay zero taxes? Don't they use the same roads and bridges as everyone else and have their assets protected by
the military. Where is big businesses fair share?

No argument but that GE paying no taxes in a year with billions in revenues is absurd. You and I agree on that.

But the undeniable truth is as follows: The Federal government has made the tax code so byzantine, so complex, and so absurd that very large companies have learned how to cheat the process and take massive deductions for depreciation, and debt maintenance, and capital investments, so as to hide their profits from taxation.

Oh, and did you know that GE avoided paying taxes in part due to subsidies for "green energy"?

GE wasn't taxed on $5 billion in U.S. profits because it utilized numerous deductions and tax credits, including tax breaks for investments in low-income housing, green energy, research and development, as well as depreciation of property.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...-paid-no-taxes-14-billion-profits_609137.html

You know who was among the first to criticize GE's tax-dodging? That renowned left-winger, Paul Ryan. Wait ...

It also bears mention that GE is a huge favorite of Bammy. Bammy hired Jeffrey R. Immelt, the chairman and chief executive of General Electric Co., as his next top outside economic adviser. "Obama asked Immelt to guide the White House as it attempts to jump-start lackluster job creation and spur a muddled recovery."

http://www.rooseveltinstitute.org/i...obs-focused-panel-ge-sends-jobs-overseas-pays

So to sum up:

• You are correct that GE is dodging taxes.
• GE is doing so in party by exploiting bogus "green energy" tax credits.
• Paul Ryan criticized GE's tax shenanigans, and recommends revising the idiotic tax code.
• But he finds no support with Obama. who is a big GE fan, and hired GE's former top corporate official to a position in his administration.
• So GE is a liberal's wet dream - and as is seemingly always the case, the left's position is "do as I say, not as I do."

I based my analysis on facts, 21. I linked supporting data. The "rich" pay their fair share of income tax, and more - much more. Corporations dodge their tax obligations with the help of the ridiculous tax code and powerful Democrats. I know this may be a bucket of ice water in your face as to your belief that Dems good, Republicans bad, but it is nothing more than the truth.

 

[Troglodyte]

Liberals love taxes because it punishes certain people while giving away other people's money to their buddies... Solyndra anyone? Green energy anyone? Big dig anyone? Unions?

Conservatives want to cut defense, social security and Medicare spending? That's the majority of federal spending.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

Funny, this thread too has commies who think they understand economics.

I own a small business. Therefore I pay double Social Security off the top, which is 15.3%. I pay the employer's matching half of FICA, which is about $10,000 a year. My Federal income tax is about 10%, in fairness as far as I know tax rates haven't changed under Bomma. PA state income tax is 3.07% and local income tax is 1%. So my total tax rate is almost 50% even though my income is less that $30,000 a year, and that's not counting property tax on my house.

 

[oneforthebus]

I own a small business. Therefore I pay double Social Security off the top, which is 15.3%. I pay the employer's matching half of FICA, which is about $10,000 a year. My Federal income tax is about 10%, in fairness as far as I know tax rates haven't changed under Bomma. PA state income tax is 3.07% and local income tax is 1%. So my total tax rate is almost 50% even though my income is less that $30,000 a year, and that's not counting property tax on my house.

But, according to some, if you deduct your business expenses and show no profit or a loss, you are "paying zero taxes". You greedy corporation you.

 

[Vader]

Conservatives want to cut defense, social security and Medicare spending? That's the majority of federal spending.

Depends on the conservative. I would cut all 3. SSI was never designed for people to live 30 years into retirement. The retirement age must be moved up.

So now a question for you... Do liberals want to cut defense, SSI, and Medicare spending? Or are they ok with deficits that are left to their grand children?

 

[ZonaBurgh]

Flat Tax Get rid of the 75,000 page tax code that no one understands and file on a post card.

I agree with Steve Forbes on this. Why is everyone against something so simple?

 

[Superman]

Flat Tax Get rid of the 75,000 page tax code that no one understands and file on a post card.

I agree with Steve Forbes on this. Why is everyone against something so simple?

becuz Burgundy must pay his fair share. duh.

 

[Rod Farva]

I own a small business. Therefore I pay double Social Security off the top, which is 15.3%. I pay the employer's matching half of FICA, which is about $10,000 a year. My Federal income tax is about 10%, in fairness as far as I know tax rates haven't changed under Bomma. PA state income tax is 3.07% and local income tax is 1%. So my total tax rate is almost 50% even though my income is less that $30,000 a year, and that's not counting property tax on my house.

You didn't build that....

 

[ark steel]

Conservatives want to cut defense, social security and Medicare spending? That's the majority of federal spending.

There is a ton of pork in "defense " spending. "Representatives " use that spending to reward constituencies with contracts in their districts.

As far as SSI and disability, that is a different pickle. Either the payroll tax must be raised to fund the promised benefits or the benefits must be decrease or both. As Vader says, the SSRA must be raised. No solution will be reasonable without that.

Then a determination needs to be made between two opposites. 1. What level of contribution is needed to support benefits at current levels? 2. What future benefits can be paid if current contribution levels stay the same?

Somewhere in between lies an answer. Due to the federal governments inability to properly manage anything and use SSI as a political tool, I lean towards lowering future benefits to a level that can be funded by current contribution levels.

 

[GMC]

I want to know why 21 doesn't pay his fair share and screws the federal government from getting it's money by taking deductions.

Because liberals don't want to give poor people their money, they want to give them your money.

 

[MT~Forged]

this just in...

everybody knows that.... however at least the conservatives are trying to lower taxes and some are even trying to shrink government.

Maybe those 2-3 people should leave their current party, form their own and move forward with the support of the majority of America.

 

[MT~Forged]

Flat Tax Get rid of the 75,000 page tax code that no one understands and file on a post card.

I agree with Steve Forbes on this. Why is everyone against something so simple?

Why not just go to a flat consumption tax and save that post card? I do not know what the numbers should be, but let's just spitball here and say 15%

Fed + State + County + Local = 15% No way to raise it.

Buy a $100,000.00 car, pay 15,000 in taxes ONE TIME. drive the car 20 years, do not pay another dime in taxes. Want to save money on your tax bill? Buy a CHEAPER car.

 

[Confluence]

Why not just go to a flat consumption tax and save that post card? I do not know what the numbers should be, but let's just spitball here and say 15%

Fed + State + County + Local = 15% No way to raise it.

Buy a $100,000.00 car, pay 15,000 in taxes ONE TIME. drive the car 20 years, do not pay another dime in taxes. Want to save money on your tax bill? Buy a CHEAPER car.

You know, a person could add up all the money in the economy for a year, like GDP, and compare that to the tax revenue in one year, and then could figure the national average tax rate base on production. Then a person could compare that number to different types of transactions, and income etc. and see what this consumption tax might look like. Just imagine all the foreign companies that would love to work in a simple tax regime.

 

[Troglodyte]

yet wages are stagnant, income inequality is rising more than ever and poverty is up.

So the rich get richer despite being taxed unfairly while everyone else struggles. How do you suppose that is?

 

[Troglodyte]

Depends on the conservative. I would cut all 3. SSI was never designed for people to live 30 years into retirement. The retirement age must be moved up.

So now a question for you... Do liberals want to cut defense, SSI, and Medicare spending? Or are they ok with deficits that are left to their grand children?

They already raised the retirement age for FUTURE beneficiaries. AKA kicking the can down the road. But grandma and gramps vote so there's no cutting the current benefit.

Yes, grandma and grandpa, conservative and liberal, are ******* future generations over because they want theirs, dammit!

I actually have an 88 year old great aunt who gives her SSI checks to her grand kids. She is one of the few that gets it.

 

[Sarge]

The problem with SSI was putting it into the general fund and allowing our government to waste it. That money might be there if not wasted on tree frog research or whatever stupid **** they spent it on.

Our government is taking in TRILLIONS in tax receipts. Trillions. And where are we? Oh yeah, TRILLIONS in debt and still borrowing. And giving them more money to waste is a good idea? Really?

 

[Steeltime]

I own a small business. Therefore I pay double Social Security off the top, which is 15.3%.

I feel your social security pain, Ron. I have been self-employed and a corporation for 8 years. I have paid in more than $120,000 in social security taxes those years.

SS is a Ponzi fraud.

 

[oneforthebus]

So the rich get richer despite being taxed unfairly while everyone else struggles. How do you suppose that is?

It's really simple actually. When you put up barriers to investing, growing businesses, and hiring, the rich hold onto their money instead of doing those things. When those things aren't happening, there is no competition for workers. Competition for workers is what drives wage growth...the government will never be able to create that. It can only create dependence on handouts which trap more people in poverty. We are seeing this play out before our eyes and your solution is "More taxing of job creators! More expensive barriers to hiring!

 

[Troglodyte]

It's really simple actually. When you put up barriers to investing, growing businesses, and hiring, the rich hold onto their money instead of doing those things. When those things aren't happening, there is no competition for workers. Competition for workers is what drives wage growth...the government will never be able to create that. It can only create dependence on handouts which trap more people in poverty. We are seeing this play out before our eyes and your solution is "More taxing of job creators! More expensive barriers to hiring!

Income taxes aren't a disincentive to make money or hire people as they're an incremental expense on profit. Businesses hire people if doing so will improve their bottom line, income taxes don't have anything to do with it.

What you are arguing is for more income inequality: The rich have gotten richer, but not rich enough to make everyone else better off.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

Income taxes aren't a disincentive to make money or hire people as they're an incremental expense on profit. Businesses hire people if doing so will improve their bottom line, income taxes don't have anything to do with it.

What you are arguing is for more income inequality: The rich have gotten richer, but not rich enough to make everyone else better off.

Once again, wow. Incredible.

 

[Confluence]

Income taxes aren't a disincentive to make money or hire people as they're an incremental expense on profit. Businesses hire people if doing so will improve their bottom line, income taxes don't have anything to do with it.

What you are arguing is for more income inequality: The rich have gotten richer, but not rich enough to make everyone else better off.

you missed her point.

If someone with a large amount of capital (money) decides that the barriers to running their own company in the USA is too large of a burden, it is likely that they will choose an alternative:
- run the company elsewhere
- invest the funds in a lower cost jurisdiction
- find an alternative tax structure to use (this is the 15% favored by Buffet and Romney et al)

Because capital can move relatively freely, it will usually find the resting place where the burdens are least. This is the efficient solution from the point of view of the person with the capital. The problem is the best interests of that person are not aligned with the US government and its policies.

You need to ask yourself: If policies are better in the US for certain special types of capital, why? If policies are better elsewhere, why?

 

[hamster]

Income taxes aren't a disincentive to make money or hire people as they're an incremental expense on profit. Businesthose. re people if doing so will improve their bottom line, income taxes don't have anything to do with it.

What you are arguing is for more income inequality: The rich have gotten richer, but not rich enough to make everyone else better off.

If I paid less income taxes, I'd have more money to spend on goods and services, and those business would need to hire employees to provide those. That is pretty simple.