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.
Earned Income and adjusted gross income (AGI) must each be less than:
$45,060 ($50,270 married filing jointly) with three or more qualifying children
$41,952 ($47,162 married filing jointly) with two qualifying children
$36,920 ($42,130 married filing jointly) with one qualifying child
$13,980 ($19,190 married filing jointly) with no qualifying children
Ummm...in your example you used a taxable income of around $15K with an after tax income of around $5K. How did you forget that considering you used the example of a burger flipper who took the standard deductions?
That's not your point. The quote below is your point.
You phrased this thread title in the hopes of drumming up the class warfare you purport to despise so.
And - there are people not paying federal income tax that are taking legitimate business deductions that are hardly "getting a free ride".
You know that business people operating at a loss or reduced income while building their business pay very little tax because their incomes are so low. You know, so their businesses don't tank in the fragile first years of operation because of a high tax burden.
Are you saying you'd rather they pay the government than grow their business? Are you not for free enterprise, and the advancement of small business in this country?
You never took advantage of the tax code while you were starting out with your business? You do own a company, right?
Oh my goodness. You took a one liner response to a tongue in cheek post by joebald (instead of the OP) to derive the basis for your interpretation of the OP (instead of the actual OP)?
I probably shouldn't have responded to a tongue-in-cheek post without caveating it since people like you seize on it with pure deflection, but I do expect you to be a little more thought provoking than to take that one-liner and casting it as the basis of the OP. That's your fallacy, which is why you don't understand my position.
But, hey, if you insist, i'll address the comment. If 47% of people are indeed not paying federal income taxes, then they are in fact getting a "free ride." How can they NOT be getting a free ride when none of their taxable federal income is being taxed and used on the services that they consume? Happy now? You should be, because my logic is sound.
The OP....focus on it. That's my position.
Last edited by AeroGuyDC; 04-19-2012 at 01:27 PM..
Reason: spelling
It isn't fair - just as it isn't fair for the rich to pay about half the rates of upper middle class wage earners like me. There should be fairness across the tax spectrum.
Oh my goodness. You took a one liner response to a tongue in cheek post by joebald (instead of the OP) to derive the basis for your interpretation of the OP (instead of the actual OP)?
I probably shouldn't have responded to a tongue-in-cheek post without caveating it, but I do expect you to be a litte more thought provoking than to take that one-liner and casting it as the basis of the OP. That's your fallacy, which is why you don't understand my position.
The OP....focus on it. That's my position.
Hilarious! These are important questions that you will never answer, and definitely weaken your position on this subject.
Hilarious! These are important questions that you will never answer, and definitely weaken your position on this subject.
What's hilarious? What questions will weaken my position. Feel free to lay them out in a way that you feel weakens the OP.
Sole propietorships are 100% irrelevant. Hell, even the tax code is 100% irrelevant to the discussion. This is about PRINCIPLE. That's what you folks don't get. We can delve into the minutiae of the tax code all day long and talk about who should or shouldn't get what and how it should be revised, but the underlying point is that one segment of society is being singled out while another is not.
Are you sure you understand? You and Finster are both in the same boat as it stands right now.
Oh my goodness. You took a one liner response to a tongue in cheek post by joebald (instead of the OP) to derive the basis for your interpretation of the OP (instead of the actual OP)?
That's your fallacy, which is why you don't understand my position.
No, I took into account your posting history, and I think your position is pretty clear.
Don't you own a business? Surely at some point during the startup process you didn't earn a sizable income for the year and your CPA made sure you didn't have to pay any personal FIT, right?
You do also understand that a lot of people who don't pay any PERSONAL federal income tax do pay corporate tax instead? So they actually are paying taxes, just not income tax?
Or do you think people that take the risk putting everything they have and all their effort and ingenuity into a business startup should pay tax twice?
Of course you understand that some of the 47% of Americans that don't pay Federal Income Tax contribute plenty and aren't getting a free ride by any means.
You do understand that once they stop operating at a loss they'll contribute plenty?
You weren't trying to infer that everyone who makes up this 47% are some kind of "recipient class", were you?
Ummm...in your example you used a taxable income of around $15K with an after tax income of around $5K. How did you forget that considering you used the example of a burger flipper who took the standard deductions?
According to my calculator, that's less than all of the EITC numbers you posted above. Your example is a PRIME candidate for the EITC credit.
$15080 > $13980
Reading Is Fundamental!!!!!
*****Earned Income***** and adjusted gross income (AGI) must each be less than:
$45,060 ($50,270 married filing jointly) with three or more qualifying children
$41,952 ($47,162 married filing jointly) with two qualifying children
$36,920 ($42,130 married filing jointly) with one qualifying child
$13,980 ($19,190 married filing jointly) with no qualifying children
It's FAIR because they're NOT SUPPOSED TO PAY INCOME TAXES. The income tax was NEVER intended to be something that everybody pays. It was intended that only the rich pay. In fact if you wanted to argue that too many are paying income taxes then you might have an argument
In 1913, the first year of the income tax, it wasn't 47% that didn't pay any income tax. It was 96%
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.
