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.
Only an idiot would expect poor people that can barely afford to put food on their table to pay the same amount of taxes as a millionaire
Calling me an idiot. I am stating fact, nothing more. And poor, by whatever definition that is, generally get quite a bit of federal and state help and earned income credit during tax time..
Pay close attention to what that scatter plot chart tells us... Note that the highest levels of government benefits and services are provided by countries (Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Belgium) in which taxes are flat (everyone pays the same tax rate) or regressive (shown as the negative values, meaning a greater tax burden is placed on those with lower incomes). And note where the USA falls on the graph. The USA has the most progressive tax system and therefore is least able to fund progressives' societal "wants" including single payer health care because the tax base is too narrow, and therefore generates insufficient tax revenue to fund such programs.
(Scatter Plot info, for those who need more explanation of what Scatter Plots tell us: Scatter Plots - Math is Fun)
Will any of you address that discrepancy? You want the goodies, but you don't want to make the sacrifices Europeans and Scandinavians make to have them. You're NOT willing to pay for them. You only want someone else to pay for your goodies.
Stop spewing this BS which doesn't understand how taxes and benefits work here.
Here's the real stats:
Those earning below €25k a year pay 0% of the tax burden in Finland (income taxes only), as they get more in benefits or redistribution. Zero, nada, null, nolla.
People earning €35-75k a year pay 52% of all income taxes.
Those earning below €25k a year pay 0% of the tax burden in Finland (income taxes only), as they get more in benefits or redistribution.
No one is saying redistribution doesn't take place. In fact, THAT'S the point.
I'll let the researchers explain it to you:
Quote:
"Prasad and Deng found that the progressivity of countries' tax codes is negatively correlated with the amount of redistribution they do. In English: The less progressive the [tax] code, the more progressive the system."
Pay close attention to what that scatter plot chart tells us... Note that the highest levels of government benefits and services are provided by countries (Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Belgium) in which taxes are flat (everyone pays the same tax rate) or regressive (shown as the negative values, meaning a greater tax burden is placed on those with lower incomes). And note where the USA falls on the graph. The USA has the most progressive tax system and therefore is least able to fund progressives' social program goals, like single payer health care because the tax base is too narrow.
Pay close attention to what that scatter plot chart tells us... Note that the highest levels of government benefits and services are provided by countries (Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Belgium) in which taxes are flat (everyone pays the same tax rate) or regressive (shown as the negative values, meaning a greater tax burden is placed on those with lower incomes). And note where the USA falls on the graph. The USA has the most progressive tax system and therefore is least able to fund progressives' social program goals, like single payer health care because the tax base is too narrow.
"...the progressivity of countries' tax codes is negatively correlated with the amount of redistribution they do.'
That's very succinct. What about that do you not understand?
Because our taxation isn't flat, it's more progressive than in the US. The highest tax burden is NOT on those with small incomes, but on those earning 35 to 75k a year.
A system where the poor would have the highest tax burden would never be accepted anywhere in Europe. That washington post article is utter rubbish
Admit it, US govt is running a communist system where half of the earnest population gets the privilege of hard work in order to pay for the other half that won't pay.
Completely false. Two liberal think tanks analyzed that and came up with the following, to their surprise...
Here's the average effective TOTAL (local, state, and federal) tax rate, by income group. The $60-100K earner would be in the Middle Quintile to the lower Fourth Quintile.
Data sources for chart: Tax Policy Center and Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy
You didn't read Ramen's post carefully. He/she stated:
Originally Posted by RamenAddict View Post
A family making $49K, which is the median household income in many areas, still pays more of their income in property taxes, sales taxes, etc than the person who has an AGI of $490K
That would be the red part of the bar in your graph, and simple inspection shows that he is correct, the red bar is bigger for middle and low income people than for the rich. Now when you add the red and the blue together, the rich do pay more taxes as a percentage of income, but the point of the article was that the difference was not as great as some would claim, and that the poor do pay a significant share of their income in taxes.
No one is saying redistribution doesn't take place. In fact, THAT'S the point.
I'll let the researchers explain it to you:
Pay close attention to what that scatter plot chart tells us... Note that the highest levels of government benefits and services are provided by countries (Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Belgium) in which taxes are flat (everyone pays the same tax rate) or regressive (shown as the negative values, meaning a greater tax burden is placed on those with lower incomes). And note where the USA falls on the graph. The USA has the most progressive tax system and therefore is least able to fund progressives' social program goals, like single payer health care because the tax base is too narrow.
That's very succinct. What about that do you not understand?
So your point is....that we should implement a socialized single-payer healthcare system, and a national sales tax to pay for it? OK, I'm onboard.
Because our taxation isn't flat, it's more progressive than in the US. The highest tax burden is NOT on those with small incomes, but on those earning 35 to 75k a year.
How can your country's tax system be more progressive than that of the US where those who earn $400,000+ bear the highest tax burden? You realize you're confirming the researchers' findings, no?
Quote:
That washington post article is utter rubbish
If you believe so, feel free to publish a rebuttal in the same peer-reviewed professional journal and post a link so we can read it. Here's the research:
In order words, to be fair, you strongly believe that rich people are severely hurting and need tax cuts, while the poor and middle class should get their taxes raised.
I don't get the OP either.
I pay taxes as I'm above $50k in household income and many people consider me to be "rich." Honestly compared to my childhood poverty, I am "rich" even though I am just middle class (our household income is over $100k).
Taxes are not hurting my bottom line honestly. I don't see why so many, non-rich people complain about taxes lol. Most of the conservatives I know who complain about taxes either #1, don't pay any taxes, they make less than $50k for household income (most are working poor and make about $30k per year and get my money as their "tax refund" lol) or #2 they are complaining about pennies on the dollar in regards to federal taxes specifically. Federal taxes honestly aren't that much. State and local taxes (sales taxes, etc.) have more of an impact on my wallet than the feds.
You didn't read Ramen's post carefully. He/she stated:
Originally Posted by RamenAddict View Post
A family making $49K, which is the median household income in many areas, still pays more of their income in property taxes, sales taxes, etc than the person who has an AGI of $490K
You misread his/her post. The etc includes other taxes, including state and federal, especially since he/she referred to capital gains taxes (which are state and federal taxes) to make his/her point.
My point stands.
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.
That washington post article is utter rubbish
