Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-24-2008, 09:40 AM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,473,857 times
Reputation: 4013

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
In 2005, the top one percent of American families - those with an income above $340,000...
Your source (the ever-dubious CNS) is quoting, though not citing, a study that would have relied on the IRS SOI tables for its data, as these are the standard source. Those tables show, by the way, that the floor for entry into the top 1% was $402K in 2005, not $340K.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
...accounted for more than 19 percent of nationwide pre-tax income, according to the study.
More than 19% in 2004, more than 21% in 2005.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
With an average federal tax rate of 33.7 percent, those families accounted for 17.1 percent of post-tax income.
The MARGINAL tax rate at $340K would have been 35% in 2005. The AVERAGE tax rate is total tax (the bottom line) divided by adjusted gross income (the top line). The average tax rate falling on the top 1% in 2005 was 21.8%, or 21.8 cents on the dollar.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-24-2008, 09:40 AM
 
Location: 'Burbs of Manhattan
471 posts, read 1,475,632 times
Reputation: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by LibertyandJusticeforAll View Post
Geez read the whole post next time..... I guess you saw the begining of the post and went off the wall. :-) Of course if the post started we aren't tax enough I would go crazy too.
Yeah. XD I read the first paragraph and was like 'WHOA THERE.'

.. I went back and read the whole post and was like "Hm. He sorta contradicted himself," but then I was like "Whatever'.
but, now I know you're joking. xD
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2008, 09:41 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,778,277 times
Reputation: 24863
I consider that $150k is enough to live quite well in this economy so anythig beyond that should be up for grabs. So I propose an all income from all sources income tax with a $150k deductable and all the rest taxed at a rate from %50 to 98% at the very highest levels. This would allow the working classes to spend thier money as they see fit, including equity investments and other savings, while the executive and investor classes paid for the potection they enjoy.

To save you the time my politics are populist and my preferred economics are socialist. I am also opposed to tyrants of any form from Kings to monopolistic plutocrats. My income is substantially less than $150K with little chance of a substantial improvement at this stage of my life.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2008, 09:43 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,101,577 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewToCA View Post
I think the wealthy do collect, but the % of payback vs amount paid in is much smaller, plus they are taxed on half of the benefit. I suspect those stating the poor pay higher taxes are doing it through the Social Security contribution, and counting the employer portion too.

Not taking sides here, I just want to establish an understood baseline for discussion.
They "can" collect, but because of their income level, it does not benefit them to collect until they reach the older age limits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2008, 09:44 AM
 
Location: PA
5,562 posts, read 5,682,324 times
Reputation: 1962
Default Taxed to Death you Decide

All these taxes didn't exist 100 years ago. Just think we started a revolution or stamp and tea tax.
Next it will be email tax, internet usage tax, tax per post in form tax.

Get the guns while we can and get ready for the second revolution.

Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax
Workers Compensation Tax
Social Security Tax
Medicare Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax
School Tax

Sales Taxes (State and Local)

Real Estate Tax
Property Tax
Building Permit Tax
Well Permit Tax
Septic Permit Tax
Utility Taxes
Severence Tax

Corporate Income Tax
Accounts Receivable Tax
Privilege Tax
Inventory Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel permit tax

Inheritance Tax
Interest Expense
Capital Gains Tax
IRS Penalties
IRS Interest Charges
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes

Marriage License Tax
Service Charge Taxes

Telephone federal excise tax
Telephone federal universal service fee tax
Telephone federal, state and local surcharge taxes
Telephone minimum usage surcharge tax
Telephone recurring and non-recurring charges tax
Telephone state and local tax
Telephone usage charge tax

Vehicle Sales Tax
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Trailer registration tax
Road Toll Booth Taxes
Toll Bridge Taxes
Toll Tunnel Taxes
Watercraft registration Tax

Gasoline Tax

Road Usage Taxes (Truckers)

Dog License Tax
Fishing License Tax
Hunting License Tax
Cigarette Tax

Last edited by TnHilltopper; 03-24-2008 at 09:52 AM.. Reason: clarity
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2008, 09:50 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,101,577 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista View Post
Your source (the ever-dubious CNS) is quoting, though not citing, a study that would have relied on the IRS SOI tables for its data, as these are the standard source. Those tables show, by the way, that the floor for entry into the top 1% was $402K in 2005, not $340K.

More than 19% in 2004, more than 21% in 2005.

The MARGINAL tax rate at $340K would have been 35% in 2005. The AVERAGE tax rate is total tax (the bottom line) divided by adjusted gross income (the top line). The average tax rate falling on the top 1% in 2005 was 21.8%, or 21.8 cents on the dollar.
WRONG.. That would only be correct if there is the exact same number of people at the top as the bottom, when in fact there clearly isnt.. (or we'd have more billionaires).

A correct equation to get the average would be (those at the bottom, divided by the adjusted gross income, multiplied by number of those at the bottom.. ) / (those at the top, divided by their adjusted gross income, multiplied by the number of those at the bottom). The statistic is even further sku'd because to be 100% accurate, you'd really need to do a division based upon every dollar that someone makes in the mid range, and divide by the number of people.

Just taking the bottom, and the top, is not valid, without considering into the equation that there are more at the bottom, and as you reach the top, the number gets smaller.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2008, 09:51 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,778,277 times
Reputation: 24863
Some of those ''taxes" are quite imiginary.

I would like to add:

Oil Company Monopoly Profits TAX
Fuel alcohol subsides TAX
War Profiteer TAX
Discount to the very wealthy with good accountants TAX
More buisness TAX relief than can be known - most of the tax code TAX
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2008, 09:52 AM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,473,857 times
Reputation: 4013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo View Post
True. The Ted Stevens "bridge to nowhere" being a recent example of the pork barrel spending that congress passed and Bush signed.
There were (and still are) very good arguments for building the bridge. The local community (Ketchikan, AK) has been trying to get a bridge built for decades. Unfortunately for them, the idea got caught up in a swirl of media-hype...back to square-one for them...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2008, 09:54 AM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,100 posts, read 39,258,323 times
Reputation: 4937
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
I consider that $150k is enough to live quite well in this economy so anythig beyond that should be up for grabs. So I propose an all income from all sources income tax with a $150k deductable and all the rest taxed at a rate from %50 to 98% at the very highest levels.
That's ridiculous!

Talk about discouraging people - that will do it

You can keep your welfare based economy
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2008, 09:55 AM
 
Location: PA
5,562 posts, read 5,682,324 times
Reputation: 1962
Default Argue over progressive tax

Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista View Post
Your source (the ever-dubious CNS) is quoting, though not citing, a study that would have relied on the IRS SOI tables for its data, as these are the standard source. Those tables show, by the way, that the floor for entry into the top 1% was $402K in 2005, not $340K.


More than 19% in 2004, more than 21% in 2005.


The MARGINAL tax rate at $340K would have been 35% in 2005. The AVERAGE tax rate is total tax (the bottom line) divided by adjusted gross income (the top line). The average tax rate falling on the top 1% in 2005 was 21.8%, or 21.8 cents on the dollar.

You guys should be arguring for no tax on income period. This progressive (socialist/communist tax) percent crap and marginal lines and adjusted gross income means nothing. Most importantly the money is your money and not the governments and they tell you how much YOUR ALLOWED TO KEEP. Those who think a fair tax is fair believe you should be taxed in the first place on your income and labor which goes against liberty and freedom.
So lets just stop asking the government to lower lower income taxes and instead demand no taxes on our income. The IRS collects and income tax only pays for the interest on the Federal Reserves Debt. Your fedeal income tax does not pay for anything that you think it does it only makes bankers rich and pays for government spending of failed programs that don't work. Be an American and demand to be an individual and not a slave to this system that clearly doesn't benefit you or Americans as a whole. I'm not asking to over throw the government just reduce it's size and scope. To be as the founders of the country suggested in 1776 and defend our constitution. Only the elite in washington and bankers win you lose by giving this government more of your money. While you look for scraps and hand outs and corporations and speical interests run to washington where the money is and the FED for bailouts. While you look to cut your heating costs, put food on the table and educate your kids your paying for interest for banks and corruption.
Still think you should argue over percent of who pays, WE ALL PAY, and I think it's time we stop paying and start getting the government back for We the people.

Last edited by LibertyandJusticeforAll; 03-24-2008 at 10:00 AM.. Reason: editing
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:45 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top