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.
It's actually 51%. 51% of tax units pay NO federal income tax whatsoever.
(A tax unit is an individual, or a married couple who are eligible to file a tax return jointly, including all dependents of that individual or married couple.)
51% pay no taxes... What's your complaint? Seems like reverse class warfare...
Who are these 51%?
36,121,000 retirees collecting Social Security
8,607,000 disabled ppl collecting SSDI
10,000,000 more collecting survivors or other forms of SS.
56,000,000 ppl that are either old, disabled or a dependant of someone that died. Are these the ppl you'd like to tax? Some getting an average of $1125 a month, you wanta tax that?
Of your 142,000,000 tax units how many returns do you guess come from that 56 mill? Maybe 40,000,000? Let's say 27% of those tax units. 51% - 27% = 24%
So, 24% of your tax units, OTHER THAN the SS recipients, don't pay taxes.... what's that unemployment rate you guys luv to cite, you know the one that includes underemployed, discouraged, AND unemployed??? What is that number 15%? Are those the ppl you wanta tax?
24% - 15% = 9%. Who might be that last segment? Maybe, students, unwed mom's, even a large segment of America living off their wealth... Heck there are several thousand tax units in the top income segments that have ways to earn income and still be part of that 51% that doesn't pay taxes. Mittens did it in 2009.
You ppl are crazy, demanding that the elderly, disabled, unwed moms, students, etc should be subject to a tax increase but billionaires should NOT.
Last edited by buzzards27; 07-20-2012 at 02:50 PM..
The average age of the bottom 50% of taxpayers is 37 years old. Not exactly elderly. A big reason for the low age of the bottom 50% is the fact that those who receive public assistance have had a birth rate 3 times that of those who don't for the past couple of decades. The severely poor are exponentially outbreeding everyone else. MANY of those children born into poverty end up being severely poor young adults, which is most certainly reflected in the age statistics.
The average age of the bottom 50% of taxpayers is 37 years old. Not exactly elderly. A big reason for the low age of the bottom 50% is the fact that those who receive public assistance have had a birth rate 3 times that of those who don't for the past couple of decades. The severely poor are exponentially outbreeding everyone else. MANY of those children born into poverty end up being severely poor young adults, which is most certainly reflected in the age statistics.
Why are you linking to Social Security stats? SS recipients are not all automatically in the lowest income groups. Plus, I posted the average age of the bottom 50%. It's 37. NO WHERE NEAR old enough to receive Social Security benefits.
"When TF"? Come back when you can discuss like an adult, not some foul mouthed punk.
What a cop-out. His post was clear and got the point across. If you're not going to participate in the discussion, then there's no need to post something off-topic.
Currently, the tax brackets for a single person are as follows:
$0 to $8,700-----------------10%
$8,700 to $35,350------------15%
$35,350 to $85,650-----------25%
$85,650 to $178,650----------28%
$178,650 to $388,350---------33%
$388,350+--------------------35%
1) Do you believe that your rate is fair (whichever it may be)?
2) Do you believe that another brackets rate should change? Which one?
3) Assuming the current rate for the top bracket is not fair, what would be a "fair share" and how would we know when it is taxed enough?
Those rates are fair, but those who have the savvy enough to exploit loop holes and only pay 14% like ol' Willard Mittens Romney should be slapped on the wrist.
Those rates are fair, but those who have the savvy enough to exploit loop holes and only pay 14% like ol' Willard Mittens Romney should be slapped on the wrist.
Why not just close the loopholes? Don't blame them for using an option that's presented to them. The problem is the tax code, not rich people.
Those rates are fair, but those who have the savvy enough to exploit loop holes and only pay 14% like ol' Willard Mittens Romney should be slapped on the wrist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jester2138
Why not just close the loopholes? Don't blame them for using an option that's presented to them. The problem is the tax code, not rich people.
I agree. Close the loopholes.
- No more deductions for yaahts
- No more deductions for hummers
- No more deductions for each child/dependent
- No more deductions for childcare
- No more deductions for various types of interests (mortgage, student loans, etc)
- Remove homeowner capital gains exemptions
- etc.
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.
what's that unemployment rate you guys luv to cite, you know the one that includes underemployed, discouraged, AND unemployed??? What is that number 15%? Are those the ppl you wanta tax?
