Federal Income Tax Reform Proposal - Effect on Californians (San Diego: offices, property)

[bad debt]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

Personally, in any case, I’ll value an 80-IQ with loyal, sincere, service oriented, honest character and simplicity any day over a 150-IQ amoral / immoral opportunist.

You might. But society does not. We like our cars, big houses, gourmet coffee, entertainment boxes, etc and people are willing to pay real $ for it. The real geniuses come up with products that people don't even realize they want yet --> Example A: the iphone.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by Bolanders

Very fair.

I want to use your exact quote:

"The problem is that when Trump lowers tax rates on corporations and billionaires, someone else has to make up for that, and the current plan is to suck everything he can from the poor and disabled...what a guy"

What we should see is that the burden on the top group ha gone down and the burden on the lower group has gone up.


2018 numbers for top 5% and top 1% aren't out by the tax foundation yet but should be in the next few months and I would be glad to run the numbers when they are released but the top 20% numbers are available.

Using 2016 as a comparison for the old tax rates makes the most sense.

In 2016 $1.442T dollars was collected in federal income taxes. There were 140,888,785 total tax payers. The top 20% of federal taxpayers would be the highest 28,177,757 number of tax payers. Those 28,177,757 paid $1.26896 Trillion dollars in taxes. To put it in easier fashion their burden was $45,034 per tax payer. The bottom 80% would have been 112,711,028 tax payers that paid total taxes of $173.04 Billion dollars. Their tax burden would have been $1535 per taxpayer.


Using your quote we should expect to see 1 of 3 things:

1). The top 20% should have a tax burden that went down while the bottom 80% had a tax burden that went up.. Example would be the $45,034 burden on the top 20% went down to 43,000 and the burden on the bottom 80% went up by $100 to $1635
2). The top 20% should have a tax burden that went up by a lesser amount (total $) than the tax burden the top 80% went up. Example of this would be the $45,034 went up to $45,124 ($100 more) while the $1535 went up to $1735 ($200 more)
3). Unchanged for the top 20% and a higher burden per taxpayer for the bottom 80%.


Now let's look at 2018 numbers after the tax cuts:

In 2018 $1.700T dollars was collected in federal income taxes. There were 140,900,000 total tax payers. The top 20% of federal taxpayers would be the highest 28,180,000 number of tax payers. Those 28,180,000 paid $1.479 Trillion dollars in taxes. To put it in easier fashion their burden was $52,484 per tax payer (an increase of about $7,000 per tax payer). The bottom 80% would have been 112,720,000 tax payers that paid total taxes of $221.0 Billion dollars. Their tax burden would have been $1961 per taxpayer (an increase of about $370).

In other words what you said is patently false. There was a far great true dollar burden on the top 20% by about $6500+ on the top 20%. Incomes were up over all taxpayers which is shown by the greater burden of all. SO Trump did not make it up by giving the rich more $ back and taking it from the poor. In fact the poor simply do not have enough $ to cover what the rich pay. Because the tax rates for the bottom 80% are lower than the tax rates on the top 20% the extra income earned in 2018 over 2016 was taxed far higher on the top 20% than on the bottom 80%.

It is fairly obvious that people here do not understand how progressive tax rates work.

You are ignoring the other taxes that middle class people pay that makes their tax burden far more onerous. I provided you with examples of that, would you like me to repost those?

[bad debt]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

You are ignoring the other taxes that middle class people pay that makes their tax burden far more onerous. I provided you with examples of that, would you like me to repost those?

At the end of the day all of the figures and numbers you two will throw at each other are irrelevant. Here is the question:

1) Should taxes (ALL taxes: sales, car registration, gas, property, income, fed income; OASDI, etc etc) be progressive?

2) If so how what percentage of their income should someone making $10K per year pay in total taxes? $25K? $50K? $100K? $250K? $500K? $1M?


You two should argue about that for awhile instead of talking past each other since that's really what it really comes down to. What percent of your own money are you allowed to keep each year?

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by bad debt

You might. But society does not. We like our cars, big houses, gourmet coffee, entertainment boxes, etc and people are willing to pay real $ for it. The real geniuses come up with products that people don't even realize they want yet --> Example A: the iphone.

Yes, I know what society “likes”. And why. People like and love all sorts of stupid things that are seriously bad for them, bad for others, and bad for the environment that we rely on to breathe and eat and drink our nourishment. People are not much different than a troop of baboons dazzled by shiny objects they will fight over to grasp.

Your big cars poison the air we all breathe. Your big houses use stupid amounts of resources, many severely toxic materials, to create more space than anyone can occupy or maintain without being a slave to. Etc. Liking something doesn’t make it good or healthy or socially reasonable. And the more labor-saving we indulge : the worse our health becomes.

Your “real geniuses” aren’t geniuses. They are carnival hucksters.

Homo sapiens don’t need iPhones. We existed and thrived and proliferated for hundreds of thousands of years without them. This is all grand illusion.

[Bolanders]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

You are ignoring the other taxes that middle class people pay that makes their tax burden far more onerous. I provided you with examples of that, would you like me to repost those?

We weren't talking about that. You said Trump tax cuts made it so the rich paid less while they passed on that burden to the middle class and poor. You were wrong. Don't obfuscate. As I said the numbers to do not support what you say

[CA4Now]

Re: "Trump's 'Massive' Middle-Class Tax Cuts"

Originally Posted by Bolanders

I think you will see that just in time for the election. My guess is he dangles a tax cut for the middle class his first program once re-elected.

God forbid. And why would we believe anything he says about a middle class tax cut when he hasn't been honest about it before?

"President Trump’s radical Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which took effect Jan. 1, 2018, has now been around long enough for a fair assessment. The verdict’s not good. The second anniversary is an apt time to review some of the law’s biggest failures — especially since the president is inviting more trouble by considering another tax-cut boondoggle as an election-year ploy.

Rushed through Congress by a Republican majority, the Trump-GOP tax cuts were promoted as a boon for the middle class. Yet in 2020, according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, the richest 1% of taxpayers will get an average tax cut of around $50,000, 75 times more than the average cut for the bottom 80%."

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/stor...ax-cut-deficit

[Bolanders]

Originally Posted by bad debt

At the end of the day all of the figures and numbers you two will throw at each other are irrelevant. Here is the question:

1) Should taxes (ALL taxes: sales, car registration, gas, property, income, fed income; OASDI, etc etc) be progressive?

2) If so how what percentage of their income should someone making $10K per year pay in total taxes? $25K? $50K? $100K? $250K? $500K? $1M?


You two should argue about that for awhile instead of talking past each other since that's really what it really comes down to. What percent of your own money are you allowed to keep each year?

I posted what I thought they should be. 5%, 15% and 25%. NO DEDUCTIONS. Ballparking it here I would say 5% on income up to $75,000. 15% on income above $75,000 up to $200,000. 25% on income above $200,000. Corporate income taxes of around 20% on profits reported to Wall St. No hiding money in other countries.

[Bolanders]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

Re: "Trump's 'Massive' Middle-Class Tax Cuts"



God forbid. And why would we believe anything he says about a middle class tax cut when he hasn't been honest about it before?

"President Trump’s radical Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which took effect Jan. 1, 2018, has now been around long enough for a fair assessment. The verdict’s not good. The second anniversary is an apt time to review some of the law’s biggest failures — especially since the president is inviting more trouble by considering another tax-cut boondoggle as an election-year ploy.

Rushed through Congress by a Republican majority, the Trump-GOP tax cuts were promoted as a boon for the middle class. Yet in 2020, according to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, the richest 1% of taxpayers will get an average tax cut of around $50,000, 75 times more than the average cut for the bottom 80%."

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/stor...ax-cut-deficit

I posted actual numbers. Opinion pieces I could not care less about. When the bottom 80% have a $1961 tax burden per tax payer how do you expect them to get a $50,000 tax cut? Thanks for the laugh. It is obvious you did no due diligence.

It is like asking someone for 64oz of water who has 2 oz of water and then claiming they are stingy because they didn't give you 64oz of water.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by Bolanders

I posted actual numbers. Opinion pieces I could not care less about.

You posted no sources for your numbers.

Figures put out by the the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy aren't anyone's opinion.

[Bolanders]

Originally Posted by CA4Now

You posted no sources for your numbers.

Figures put out by the the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy aren't anyone's opinion.

LOL. Believe what you want or what makes you feel better. All these numbers are from the taxfoundation.org.

Face it your made up numbers that you all got called out on were exposed. Keep that head buried. It makes for better rhetoric.

If you understood progressive tax rates you would understand that the top 20% are paying 24%+ tax rates on much of their income while the poor never come close to paying 24% on any of their money earned. Paying 24% instead of 28% does not somehow push that burden onto the poor who at most went from paying 25% to 22% on some of their money and mostly paid 10-12%.