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 02-17-2010, 08:08 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,228,994 times
Reputation: 9383

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nevergoingback View Post
Glad we agree that bottom 50% shouldn't be responsible for much of the tax burden since they earn such a small percentage of the countries' wealth.
I dont think anyone proclaimed they should be burdened with a high percentage of taxes..
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevergoingback View Post
How many of those "poor" homeowners are retired and on SS?
What difference does that make to the topic?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevergoingback View Post
They aren't paying their fair share right?
Are the little voices talking to you? I never proclaimed that..
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevergoingback View Post
Funny to hear a rightwinger despising the home mortgage interest deduction.
Seek medication, I didnt say that either.. As an individual who doesnt pay federal taxes partially due to mortgage interest deductions, this would be rather hypocritical of me to criticize..
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevergoingback View Post
LOL. These poor people aren't paying a mortgage, it's already been paid.
Are you making up your argument as you go along? First they dont own homes, now they dont pay mortgages.. Can you backup this claim either?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevergoingback View Post
The mortgage deduction on a 100,000 home aint much at all.
Its about $5600.. If you earn $30K this is a SUBSTANTIAL deduction and can indeed wipe out taxable liabilities, if you earn $300,000, its wont.. (and yes, this number is accurate, I'm doing my taxes as we speak and thats the deduction I have on one of my mortgages that we owe $100K on)

All you did was prove that those who earn less have a higher percentage of their income subject to deductions and more than likely not paying taxes due to those deductions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-17-2010, 08:12 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
297 posts, read 520,687 times
Reputation: 384
Quote:
Less than $20,000, 46% own, 48% rent
$20,000-$29,999, 59% own, 38% rent
$30,000-$49,999, 70% own, 28% rent
$50,000-$74,999, 83% own, 15% rent
$75,000 or more, 90% own, 8% rent..
how are you owning a house making 20k or 30k a year? are people buying homes right out of college?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2010, 08:14 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,228,994 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by traveler92 View Post
how are you owning a house making 20k or 30k a year? are people buying homes right out of colleges?
There are lots of homes in america for $50K or less. Earning $20k a year would indeed easily qualify one to buy a $50K home..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2010, 08:34 PM
 
6,734 posts, read 9,356,493 times
Reputation: 1857
We should have a flat tax.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2010, 09:52 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,636,755 times
Reputation: 27720
Quote:
Originally Posted by traveler92 View Post
how are you owning a house making 20k or 30k a year? are people buying homes right out of college?
Not any more thankfully. A few years ago they actually were..but we all know what happened, don't we.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2010, 09:53 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,636,755 times
Reputation: 27720
I think it's more "we should hate the rich" propaganda so their taxes can be raised by the government.
Don't drink the koolaid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2010, 10:13 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,320 posts, read 45,051,012 times
Reputation: 13791
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Don't drink the koolaid.


Come on everyone... know the facts so you don't get played for a fool:
http://www.city-data.com/forum/12944804-post8.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2010, 10:32 PM
 
Location: Earth
24,620 posts, read 28,326,558 times
Reputation: 11416
Quote:
Originally Posted by harrymiafl View Post
Another sleazy inflammatory bigoted anti-rich article...

Most of the wealth of the 400 richest is in the form of capital gains,so with a top rate of 15% it's quite normal to have an effective tax rate of 16.67 %...

Much smear effort about nothing...
Please explain what was untrue in the article?
Or is your rant simply "Another sleazy inflammatory bigoted" pro-rich rant?
What factual argument can you put forth?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2010, 10:36 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,867,921 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
- Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations
Like everything else in the book on Capitalism, this quote makes sense. Having said that, it is scary to think that the USA's Gini Coefficient is trending more towards Mexico than towards the rest of the developed world. What does it mean? Greater concentration of wealth in the hands of a few, and a shrinking middle class. Good for economy in the long term? Only two kind would agree... those who are rich, and those who are stupid.

As it is, less than 1% of wealth is owned by the bottom 40% in America, while top 1% owns about 40% of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-18-2010, 06:15 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,833 posts, read 19,539,982 times
Reputation: 9632
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevergoingback View Post
That bottom 50% only make 10% of the income.

Your second sentence is just plain hogwash, unless you know alot of people that just flat out cheat on their taxes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevergoingback View Post
Do you expect the bottom 50% to pay 90% of the taxes? The math won't work.

The bottom 50% is <32,000/year, way below the $50,000 mark that I was responding to. People that make less than 30,000 a year don't own homes. At least not at a high percentage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYChistorygal View Post
BULL! I wish people would stop passing this around. I've made less than 50k all my life and I always have a tax bill. The only time I get anything back is when I've over paid in the first place.

last year I made 59,800.....paid a little over 3500....got back 6500......ZERO Federal INCOME tax..the fed even pays me to work.....facts
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:17 AM.

© 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