Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I happened to catch this from Mark Levin the other day, found it striking, and decided to look it up on line when I got home. Mark Levin
Economist Mark J Perry found this interesting factoid. According to 2009 IRS data, the 400 top taxpayers in 2009 shelled out $16.1 billion, while the bottom 50% of taxpayers totaled $19.5 billion in taxes, or less than 25% more.
Something to cite next time someone claims that the rich don't pay their fair share in taxes.
Note also how inherently unstable this structure is. What happens if just a few of those 400 decide to take their money and go to some small offshore tax haven? Wouldn't it be more stable to have a much more broad-based structure instead of trying to drain so much dough from such a tiny group?
I happened to catch this from Mark Levin the other day, found it striking, and decided to look it up on line when I got home. Mark Levin
Economist Mark J Perry found this interesting factoid. According to 2009 IRS data, the 400 top taxpayers in 2009 shelled out $16.1 billion, while the bottom 50% of taxpayers totaled $19.5 billion in taxes, or less than 25% more.
Something to cite next time someone claims that the rich don't pay their fair share in taxes.
Note also how inherently unstable this structure is. What happens if just a few of those 400 decide to take their money and go to some small offshore tax haven? Wouldn't it be more stable to have a much more broad-based structure instead of trying to drain so much dough from such a tiny group?
You speak of a logic that liberals will never understand.
And 47% or 52% by now don't pay federal taxes (they get them all back plus some more) so imagine that bottom 50% is really not the bottom because the true bottom don't pay taxes.
What you are looking at my friends is the MIDDLE CLASS because we are now the bottom that PAY TAXES.
How much these among the top 400 made per capita, compared to the bottom 50%? And I'm assuming that will be the math only for income, not capital gains.
I happened to catch this from Mark Levin the other day, found it striking, and decided to look it up on line when I got home. Mark Levin
Economist Mark J Perry found this interesting factoid. According to 2009 IRS data, the 400 top taxpayers in 2009 shelled out $16.1 billion, while the bottom 50% of taxpayers totaled $19.5 billion in taxes, or less than 25% more.
Something to cite next time someone claims that the rich don't pay their fair share in taxes.
Note also how inherently unstable this structure is. What happens if just a few of those 400 decide to take their money and go to some small offshore tax haven? Wouldn't it be more stable to have a much more broad-based structure instead of trying to drain so much dough from such a tiny group?
How much these among the top 400 made per capita, compared to the bottom 50%? And I'm assuming that will be the math only for income, not capital gains.
Exactly. I'll bet Levin left that information out.
Top 400 taxpayers paid nearly as much as the bottom 50%.
I don't have information that would cause me to disbelieve your information. I'd like to know, though, the number of wealthy people who should be in that Top 400 but because of loopholes or off-shore banking pay little or greatly reduced taxes. Many of the bottom 50% are likely unemployed.
I happened to catch this from Mark Levin the other day, found it striking, and decided to look it up on line when I got home. Mark Levin
Economist Mark J Perry found this interesting factoid. According to 2009 IRS data, the 400 top taxpayers in 2009 shelled out $16.1 billion, while the bottom 50% of taxpayers totaled $19.5 billion in taxes, or less than 25% more.
Something to cite next time someone claims that the rich don't pay their fair share in taxes.
Note also how inherently unstable this structure is. What happens if just a few of those 400 decide to take their money and go to some small offshore tax haven? Wouldn't it be more stable to have a much more broad-based structure instead of trying to drain so much dough from such a tiny group?
Did they say how many of them took advantage of tax deductions?
How much these among the top 400 made per capita, compared to the bottom 50%? And I'm assuming that will be the math only for income, not capital gains.
Clearly the top 400 made more, the bottom, my definition are poor and dont earn much
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
