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.
There actually is a group to which you've already indicated several times that facts are utterly meaningless to you in the face of your own preconceived notions. Anyone can read the post histories.
Meanwhile, we can all take a look at net tax payers and net government services receivers, by income group per each dollar of tax paid, local and state, federal, and total. Notice how it's grotesquely skewed. Redistributing wealth in a HUGE way, in other words...
What's masked in "spending per dollar of taxes" is scale and I suspect that's why the Tax Foundation used that metric. Your graph makes it look like most money is spent on the poor, while it is not. All of the safety net programs combined are 12% of spending.
Is it me or is this a REALLY good idea. it is essentially abolishing all taxes in exchange for simple 23% consumption tax (with a annual consumption allowance between $10k and $40k, depending on how many dependents you have) .. any country using a tax system like this will HAUL in businesses from the around the world.. HAUL in jobs.. you would be able to tax consumption by illegal immigrants too, or tourists or ANYONE. it will even encourage investments in new businesses which will, together with foreign businesses from around the world, cause a jobs boom. from an economic point of view, this will solve alot of the current economic problems.
The Kerry's do not now, nor would they under a Fair Tax, pay.
The "Fair Tax" simply would not apply to the types of toys they would buy. (The paper toys, the real estate, the servant's pay, etc.)
There actually is a group to which you've already indicated several times that facts are utterly meaningless to you in the face of your own preconceived notions. Anyone can read the post histories.
Meanwhile, we can all take a look at net tax payers and net government services receivers, by income group per each dollar of tax paid, local and state, federal, and total. Notice how it's grotesquely skewed. Redistributing wealth in a HUGE way, in other words...
Don't give me your worthless charts and arguments. You continue to knock down your own straw men, and you know it. I rejected you entire premise of financial accounting under this fallacious labor/capital economic model long ago. I have made it quite clear that my position is very much Georgist and geo libertarian, macro classical economic, and user fee based. Lets see, a consumption tax randomly taxing someone who wanted to buy some apples rather than someone who uses the bridge pay the toll to pay off the bridge bond? Nor do we want to tax the person on the other side of the bridge whose real estate ground rent just shot up a few 100k. Right, tax the apples and don't tax the fat cat windfall or the dirver that use the bridge. Idiots. The fair tax ?
Bwahhhahahhahha ......
That is besides the fact that in a nation with about 200 trillion in assets, the insurance to protect them must be more costly for those who own it. A homeless person needs to pay for a fire truck? Someone with a Mercedes needs to pay the same amount of military and police protection insurance as someone with a bike?(better tell you that's a metaphor)
Everyone would have "skin in the game" with the Fair Tax and the IRS would be abolished...this is needed..now! Let's abolish the IRS by repealing the 16th amendment...now! Join Senator Ted Cruz in accomplishing this by calling 800.655.3707 today!
The Kerry's do not now, nor would they under a Fair Tax, pay.
The "Fair Tax" simply would not apply to the types of toys they would buy. (The paper toys, the real estate, the servant's pay, etc.)
I disagree....the wealthy would definitely pay more dollars in Fair Tax than others simply because their consumption is far greater. We all receive the same government services that the Kerrys and other wealthy receive...why shouldn't we all have "skin in the game?"
Everyone would have "skin in the game" with the Fair Tax and the IRS would be abolished...this is needed..now! Let's abolish the IRS by repealing the 16th amendment...now! Join Senator Ted Cruz in accomplishing this by calling 800.655.3707 today!
Not necessarily, a retired homeowner without a mortgage living frugally could pay NOTHING and even get free money, since they would pay very little FairTax on their housing (largest expense for most people) and would get the prebate like everyone else...while a burger flipper paying half his income on rent and spending all his earnings would pay more tax than the retiree living in a McMansion and would probably have to cut back and become worse off.
I disagree....the wealthy would definitely pay more dollars in Fair Tax than others simply because their consumption is far greater. We all receive the same government services that the Kerrys and other wealthy receive...why shouldn't we all have "skin in the game?"
Actually, the consumption - or at least the spending - of the wealthy, which is the target of FairTax - is not "far greater".
When Herman Cain's 9-9-9 tax proposal was getting a lot of attention, a "9-9-9 tax calculator" appeared and when I played around with it, discovered that the operating assumption was that you got above a basic middle class standard of living - $50,000 or so - people would pay low marginal tax rates in the neighborhood of about 15% - 20% because spending was projected to rise only by that amount.
Government regulation is regressive, and thus exacts a regressive 'regulatory tax' on lower incomes. so the working class already has a lot of skin in the game.
??? I'm in the bottom quintie, exactly what net government services am I getting? No TANF, no Section 8, no food stamps, no EITC, no WIC.
Exactly the same government services that the top 20% are getting (they also get no TANF, no Section 8, no food stamps, no EITC, no WIC), but you're paying FAR LESS in taxes than the value of the services you receive.
What's masked in "spending per dollar of taxes" is scale and I suspect that's why the Tax Foundation used that metric. Your graph makes it look like most money is spent on the poor, while it is not. All of the safety net programs combined are 12% of spending.
The chart shows EXACTLY what it says it does: Government Spending Received Per Dollar of Taxes Paid
Everyone knows government spending isn't limited to safety net programs. It's extremely dishonest of you to try to interpret the data as only safety net spending.
More info:
Quote:
[T]he top 20 percent of households now pay more than 94 percent of federal income taxes, a record high. The data also shows that effective tax rates have been going down for almost everyone, except the top 1 percent of households. Meanwhile... the share of income earned by the top 1 percent has collapsed back to where it was in the late-1980s and mid-1990s.
And there's always the Chairman of the Economics Department at Harvard...
Quote:
"Because transfer payments are, in effect, the opposite of taxes, it makes sense to look not just at taxes paid, but at taxes paid minus transfers received. For 2009, the most recent year available, here are taxes less transfers as a percentage of market income (income that households earned from their work and savings):
Bottom quintile: -301 percent Second quintile: -42 percent Middle quintile: -5 percent
Fourth quintile: 10 percent
Highest quintile: 22 percent
Top one percent: 28 percent
The negative 301 percent means that a typical family in the bottom quintile receives about $3 in transfer payments for every dollar earned.
The most surprising fact to me was that the effective tax rate is negative for the middle quintile. According to the CBO data, this number was +14 percent in 1979 (when the data begin) and remained positive through 2007. It was negative 0.5 percent in 2008, and negative 5 percent in 2009. That is, the middle class, having long been a net contributor to the funding of government, is now a net recipient of government largess."
There are MANY more takers than contributors. That's NOT sustainable...
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.
