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.
One might think that CD folks are billionaires in their defense of the rich. The original idea was that if the wealthy had more money then much of that money would trickle down to the working folks.
Was a myth yesterday, is a myth today, and will be a myth for the rest of time.
Not one Republican politician, nor any economist, has ever promoted anything called "trickle down." And I already crushed the concept that Reagan's admin was anywhere close to supply side economics, as not once in his entire 8 years in office did the size/cost of the government decrease, and supply side is invalid without a reduction in public sector spending.
You guys keep setting up that trickle down straw man, and I'll happily keep knocking it down.
The top 400 taxpayers (minimum income: $126.8 million) do get a slight break likely due to the capital gains tax, and pay an average effective federal income tax rate of 23.13%.
What's stunning is how sharp the drop off the average effective federal income tax rate is when it comes to the top 5% to 10% (income: $140,000 to $200,000). They pay an average effective federal income tax rate of 14.05%. And then the effective tax rate drops exponentially from there as income decreases to the point that the average effective federal income tax rate of the bottom 40% is actually negative.
Take an income close to medium $49,300. This person would pay 8% of the total taxes. A person who earns $222,900 would contribute 18% taxes, and someone who made it to the 1% earns $754,800 paying a total of 30% tax. In comparison, my second example pays 2.25 times more tax and the rich person in my example pays 3.75 times more.
Now here is the interesting part. A lot of people would probably identify with my first example, the second example earns 4.5 times more and the third example earns 15.3 times more. A huge chunk of the extra incomes goes out of the economy and into securities and stock markets where it multiply exponentially without doing any work and without any real value to society.
Once it has been multiplied it is used in many novice ways.
I hope you realize the chart in your link shows the effective total federal taxrate, NOT how much of the total taxes each income earner pays.
So... Do the math....
Given the data you provided based on that chart:
$49,300 earner pays $3,944 in federal taxes.
$222,900 earner pays $40,122. Earns 4.5 times as much as the first, but pays 10.2 times as much in taxes.
$754,800 earner pays $226,440. Earns 15.3 times as much as the first, but pays 57.4 times as much in taxes.
Let's look at something very interesting in the chart thelogo linked... Note that EVERY income group, even the very lowest, pays corporate income tax. Anyone want to guess why that is before I tell you?
When politicians say that the rich should pay more in taxes I ask pay more for what reason?
Because they use more, and they get more benefit.
Roads
Military support
Educated Workforce
Etc.
People should pay for what they use. I don't support charging them more "just because they make more". I support them paying their fair share, and to stop subsidizing Exxon, Amazon and the like. They can pay their share and will still be crazy profitable, which I think is awesome!
When politicians say that the rich should pay more in taxes I ask pay more for what reason?
When you look at the democrats who are running for president. They all want medicare-for-all and some form of free college. These things would require more taxation. But many Americans disagree with these things and the higher taxes that will come with them. So should the rich be paying more in taxes just to provide more funding for things many Americans disagree with? Aren't the rich paying enough taxes to cover our current government services and programs?
I don't know. Why should those of us with no kids pay more? When you give tax breaks to parents you are making those without kids pay more. Is that fair?
You do realize there is a huge difference between being a "millionaire/billionaire" and someone who is "making" a certain amount of money annually, right?
Or are you saying you are for Warren's proposal to tax wealth on top of taxing income?
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.
