Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [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 01-16-2016, 06:25 AM
 
Location: Living on the Coast in Oxnard CA
16,289 posts, read 32,342,958 times
Reputation: 21891

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mighty_Pelican View Post
I have always been curious about this but don't know which data points I need to start from to get a range of estimates. How much do you have to pay in taxes to be a net contributor into the system versus being a burden on taxpayers and the government? How much does one have to pay to "carry his own weight" so to speak? I want to be able to determine who is leeching off taxpayers by consuming more in taxpayer funded services than they effectively contribute.
The bottom 20% of tax payers take home more than they pay. They get all the cool little wealth transfer benefits that higher dollar earners do not get.

The top .01% pay 37.9% of the tax bill.

The top 2.4% pay 48.9% of the tax bill. This is based on all tax returns over $250,000 a year.

The top 15% pay 77.7% of the tax bill. Based on tax returns of $100,000 and more.

The top 36.6% pay 93.8% of the tax bill. Based on tax returns of $50,000 and more.

The bottom 25% of wage earners pay .2% of the tax bill. (That is 1/5 of a percent)

The bottom 25% of tax payers get all the benefits. Earned Income Credit, which is funny because it was income earned by someone else and not the low income tax payer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-16-2016, 07:28 AM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,455,098 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOON2BNSURPRISE View Post
The bottom 20% of tax payers take home more than they pay. They get all the cool little wealth transfer benefits that higher dollar earners do not get.

The top .01% pay 37.9% of the tax bill.

The top 2.4% pay 48.9% of the tax bill. This is based on all tax returns over $250,000 a year.

The top 15% pay 77.7% of the tax bill. Based on tax returns of $100,000 and more.

The top 36.6% pay 93.8% of the tax bill. Based on tax returns of $50,000 and more.

The bottom 25% of wage earners pay .2% of the tax bill. (That is 1/5 of a percent)

The bottom 25% of tax payers get all the benefits. Earned Income Credit, which is funny because it was income earned by someone else and not the low income tax payer.

??? I'm in the bottom 20% and I pay income taxes and don't get EITC or wealth transfer benefits. Baby mamas get a lot, childless adults not so much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2016, 07:35 AM
 
Location: Living on the Coast in Oxnard CA
16,289 posts, read 32,342,958 times
Reputation: 21891
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
??? I'm in the bottom 20% and I pay income taxes and don't get EITC or wealth transfer benefits. Baby mamas get a lot, childless adults not so much.
For single filers you need to make less than $14,820 to get the EITC.

If you are making $14,820 or less in adjusted gross income, chances are you probably don't pay taxes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2016, 07:44 AM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,455,098 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOON2BNSURPRISE View Post
$3 million in yearly profit?

The average C store is making a profit of about 19%. That would have your store making $15,000,000 in yearly sales? The industry is a $41 billion industry with 152,794 C stores in the USA. That is an average yearly gross income of $268,335 a year. I realize many stores are making more than that and many are making less than that.

$500,000 yearly payroll?

Lets say that you pay the manager $60,000 to run the place with an assistant manager making $45,000 a year. That leaves you with $395,000 a year for minimum wage employees. My area we pay $8 an hour minimum wage. Lets say that the employer pays $12 an hour with pay and other costs. That store should have 15 full time and 1 part time employee. First off I don't know any C stores that have that many employees. Many of the independent stores are run by an owner that works all the time. with a few employees. I worked in the industry years ago in a large C store and we had 8 employees, not all of them full time.

Several stores, not just one, about 30 employees, and some extremely profitable high-volume locations with favorable long-term leases. An example of a business where the owner did pretty much everything right.

Costs are much lower than you think, all hourly employees are within 25 cents of minimum wage and stores are understaffed for the sales volume. The managers are not paid nearly as well as you think; the workplace joke at the time of an earlier minimum wage hike was that if the managers didn't get a raise by the the end of the year, the hourly employees would be better paid than the managers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2016, 07:48 AM
 
Location: CT
3,440 posts, read 2,526,933 times
Reputation: 4639
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mighty_Pelican View Post
I have always been curious about this but don't know which data points I need to start from to get a range of estimates. How much do you have to pay in taxes to be a net contributor into the system versus being a burden on taxpayers and the government? How much does one have to pay to "carry his own weight" so to speak? I want to be able to determine who is leeching off taxpayers by consuming more in taxpayer funded services than they effectively contribute.
As you can see from the responses you're getting, this isn't simply a divide by "X" equation, there are regional considerations as well as state and federal level factors. However, this could be an interesting analysis, and especially helpful in future budget planning to determine if we're picking a sustainable strategy of wealth re-distribution. When enough people realize they're better off earning less and getting more from the government, the money to pay for it comes from those that can pay, what happens to the upper 25- 30% who already pay the majority of taxes? Our capitalistic system may need a little bit of socialism to balance out income disparity, while at the same time reward those who profit from investment. But, we need to be vigilant not to fall to failed systems like communism, where no-one is rich and no-one is poor, and your economy stagnates.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2016, 08:00 AM
 
Location: Buckeye, AZ
38,936 posts, read 23,894,142 times
Reputation: 14125
Quote:
Originally Posted by snowtired14 View Post
As you can see from the responses you're getting, this isn't simply a divide by "X" equation, there are regional considerations as well as state and federal level factors. However, this could be an interesting analysis, and especially helpful in future budget planning to determine if we're picking a sustainable strategy of wealth re-distribution. When enough people realize they're better off earning less and getting more from the government, the money to pay for it comes from those that can pay, what happens to the upper 25- 30% who already pay the majority of taxes? Our capitalistic system may need a little bit of socialism to balance out income disparity, while at the same time reward those who profit from investment. But, we need to be vigilant not to fall to failed systems like communism, where no-one is rich and no-one is poor, and your economy stagnates.
This. Social capitalism is the answer. However you have free-market anarchists who will disagree with it until the end of time. Hopefully their numbers drop when they realize the US is better off through social capitalism.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2016, 08:01 AM
 
Location: Whoville....
25,386 posts, read 35,537,397 times
Reputation: 14692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mighty_Pelican View Post
I have always been curious about this but don't know which data points I need to start from to get a range of estimates. How much do you have to pay in taxes to be a net contributor into the system versus being a burden on taxpayers and the government? How much does one have to pay to "carry his own weight" so to speak? I want to be able to determine who is leeching off taxpayers by consuming more in taxpayer funded services than they effectively contribute.

Honestly, if you pay into the system you're good. If everyone paid into the system we'd be in a much better place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2016, 12:12 PM
 
2,441 posts, read 2,608,161 times
Reputation: 4644
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOON2BNSURPRISE View Post
The bottom 20% of tax payers take home more than they pay. They get all the cool little wealth transfer benefits that higher dollar earners do not get.

The top .01% pay 37.9% of the tax bill.

The top 2.4% pay 48.9% of the tax bill. This is based on all tax returns over $250,000 a year.

The top 15% pay 77.7% of the tax bill. Based on tax returns of $100,000 and more.

The top 36.6% pay 93.8% of the tax bill. Based on tax returns of $50,000 and more.

The bottom 25% of wage earners pay .2% of the tax bill. (That is 1/5 of a percent)

The bottom 25% of tax payers get all the benefits. Earned Income Credit, which is funny because it was income earned by someone else and not the low income tax payer.
Your data are inaccurate. Maybe out of date?

The top 50% earn over $52,000, top 15% earn over $124,000 according to cnn.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2016, 12:56 PM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,455,098 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by WildColonialGirl View Post
Your data are inaccurate. Maybe out of date?

The top 50% earn over $52,000, top 15% earn over $124,000 according to cnn.

Numbers like this often vary simply because people are citing different time points, e.g one source might have numbers from 2014, someone else from 2012, and a third from 2010.

e.g. when I try to look up income, wealth, or other economic data, the first numbers I find are often not the most recent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-16-2016, 04:00 PM
 
34,278 posts, read 19,368,360 times
Reputation: 17261
3.8 trillion was spent last year. If we have 100 million working folks, then the average needed from them would be about 38,000 per working person.

BUT the reality is that last year only 1.9 trillion came in from income taxes, so if your federal taxes came to more then 19,000 last year (mine did) you are paying the average. (not including social security which is another 1.1 trillion in income).
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 > Economics

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:57 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