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)
 
Old 01-21-2015, 06:26 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,500,230 times
Reputation: 9619

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Se7ski View Post
I googled and you're right. So people really need to stop telling me that America's the wealthiest nation on the planet. =/
But since we're not the wealthiest nation then I don't get why we need to have a $689,591,000,000 defense budget. Russia's defense budget is only $64,000,000,000 and they have the 2nd most powerful military on Earth.
10 Most Powerful Militaries In The World - Business Insider

Imo, if we only had a 150,000,000,000 defense budget then we could still have the most powerful military on Earth - Plus there would be $539,591,000,000 left for a Fix America budget. If our military needs $689,591,000,000 just to beat Russia then it must be seriously incompetent... just saying.
uhm...our defense budget is right in line with the world average

our CURRENT defense budget is only 4.1% of our GNP....china spends 3.9% of its gdp on military.......right in comparison with the rest of the world at 2-6%

france's defense budget is 500 million euro...while their gdp is about 1.4 trillion.....our spending is 670 billion with a gdp of 16+ trillion.....so france actually spends MORE as a percentage of their gdp


defense spending as a % of GDP puts us at #27meaning 26 other countries spend MORE than us on their military as a percent of their gdp


we cut our military personnel nearly in half in the 90's..and it made it more difficult to do their jobs

from 2008 to present

defense spending has increased 16%....... 593b to 673b
medicare spending has increase 29%....... 386b to 598b
medicaid spending has increased 44%..... 201b to 339b.....medicare/ciad makes up over 800 billion of our spending and is INCREASED big time each year
ss spending has increased 17% ........ 612B to 820b

the budget 'projects' the costs yearly for 10 years beyond

fy 15(this current year)

ss federal COST will be................ 900 billion
mediCARE federal COST will be...... 650 billion
mediCAID federal cost will be........ 400 billion

for a total of just those 3.........over 2 trillion A YEAR, and rising every year

 
Old 01-21-2015, 07:03 AM
 
Location: Philadelphia
11,998 posts, read 12,944,919 times
Reputation: 8365
Quote:
Originally Posted by Se7ski View Post
I googled and you're right. So people really need to stop telling me that America's the wealthiest nation on the planet. =/
But since we're not the wealthiest nation then I don't get why we need to have a $689,591,000,000 defense budget. Russia's defense budget is only $64,000,000,000 and they have the 2nd most powerful military on Earth.
10 Most Powerful Militaries In The World - Business Insider

Imo, if we only had a 150,000,000,000 defense budget then we could still have the most powerful military on Earth - Plus there would be $539,591,000,000 left for a Fix America budget. If our military needs $689,591,000,000 just to beat Russia then it must be seriously incompetent... just saying.
Agreed...the military industrial complex had no small part in helping to destroy our country.

And the MIC only benefits the 1% yet again, like all partnerships between Government and nation-less corporations-from banking to war to prisons to corporate agriculture to healthcare to education.

Not only do some right wingers blame the poor for being poor but they cannot bring themselves to blame those in power for the state of things-they blame the poor for that too. It's pathetic.

Last edited by 2e1m5a; 01-21-2015 at 07:26 AM..
 
Old 01-21-2015, 07:18 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,060 posts, read 44,877,895 times
Reputation: 13718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magritte25 View Post
They don't need as much as the poor because they help make legislation that favors their interests.
How is it in their interest to make legislation that forces them to pay more than a 3 times higher federal income tax rate than the middle class?

Top 25-50% average effective federal income tax rate: 7.21%
Top 0.1% average effective federal income tax rate: 21.67%
Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data | Tax Foundation

To understand the impact of that...

Average $54,000 (average income for top 25-50%) earner pays $3,894 in federal income tax.
Average $1,695,136 (and that's the minimum for the top 0.1%) earner pays $367,336 in federal income tax, or a MINIMUM of about 100 times more than the middle class pays, while only earning about 30 times more.

That is why many perceive the "tax the rich" crowd to be egregiously greedy takers.
 
Old 01-21-2015, 07:20 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,060 posts, read 44,877,895 times
Reputation: 13718
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2e1m5a View Post
Is this something you think needs to be changed?
No. What needs to change is that those who receive the greatest value in government services and benefits need to be bearing the brunt of the tax burden. That's the European model. Lefties LOVE the European social democracies, so where's the problem?
 
Old 01-21-2015, 07:24 AM
 
Location: West Coast of Europe
25,947 posts, read 24,759,378 times
Reputation: 9728
There is that odd notion here that fair in this context means percentage. I think that is nonsense. Fair is meant in the sense of what someone can afford to pay.

My question would be: when will the upper 25% be fair enough to refuse their exaggerated income in the first place in an attempt to boost egalitarianism and bring about a better society with less poverty (i.e. more tax payers)? But that requires wisdom, altruism, and humility which is missing with most people, who instead just try to extract as much money from the system as they can.
 
Old 01-21-2015, 07:44 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,060 posts, read 44,877,895 times
Reputation: 13718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neuling View Post
There is that odd notion here that fair in this context means percentage. I think that is nonsense. Fair is meant in the sense of what someone can afford to pay.
You don't really want that. There are people earning 6 and even 7 figures that live paycheck to paycheck. They can afford to pay nothing, so is that what they should pay?
 
Old 01-21-2015, 08:19 AM
 
13,511 posts, read 17,044,420 times
Reputation: 9691
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
And to pay those dependent on public assistance because they won't support themselves. Exactly.

I added the for free part, because the percentage of work each taxpayer labors for free is exactly equivalent to their total effective tax rate. And it's NOT equal. The more one has achieved, and therefore the higher their income, the higher percentage of the year one is forced to labor for free as a tax slave.

Here are the average TOTAL (local, state, and federal which includes payroll taxes) effective tax rates, by income group. The bottom quintile only has to be a tax slave for 13% of the year. The top 1% has to be a tax slave for 43% of the year:



(Data Sources, two liberal think tanks: Tax Policy Center and Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy)

(The images appearing in this post do not violate copyright law. The Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc. ruling in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit explained why the method of inline linking which causes the images to appear in this post does not violate US copyright law.)
"Tax slave"

Get over it, kid.
 
Old 01-21-2015, 08:27 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,060 posts, read 44,877,895 times
Reputation: 13718
Quote:
Originally Posted by dman72 View Post
"Tax slave"
Yes, that's exactly what it is when some are forced to work for free more than others.

Why shouldn't EVERYONE have to work for free the same percentage? That's fair to all.
 
Old 01-21-2015, 08:36 AM
 
13,511 posts, read 17,044,420 times
Reputation: 9691
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Yes, that's exactly what it is when some are forced to work for free more than others.

Why shouldn't EVERYONE have to work for free the same percentage? That's fair to all.
Maybe when I was 12 years old I viewed it that way.

The world is a little more complicated than that. The fact that you think that these infantile little quotes you make are worthy of a chin scratch makes them even more absurd. Raving about how taxes are slavery and stealing is not exactly my idea of enlightened compelling thought. They are about the most simplistic, narrow minded way to look at an issue. Congratulations.

I've already stated that I pay far more taxes as someone in the top 5% then someone in the bottom 5%..and I wouldn't trade places with them under any circumstances. To walk around whining about taxes in my position in life would make me feel pretty sad. Maybe if I listened to Rush Limbaugh all day, I'd see it differently.
 
Old 01-21-2015, 08:39 AM
 
Location: West Coast of Europe
25,947 posts, read 24,759,378 times
Reputation: 9728
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
And to pay those dependent on public assistance because they won't support themselves. Exactly.

I added the for free part, because the percentage of work each taxpayer labors for free is exactly equivalent to their total effective tax rate. And it's NOT equal. The more one has achieved, and therefore the higher their income, the higher percentage of the year one is forced to labor for free as a tax slave.

Here are the average TOTAL (local, state, and federal which includes payroll taxes) effective tax rates, by income group. The bottom quintile only has to be a tax slave for 13% of the year. The top 1% has to be a tax slave for 43% of the year:



(Data Sources, two liberal think tanks: Tax Policy Center and Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy)

(The images appearing in this post do not violate copyright law. The Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc. ruling in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit explained why the method of inline linking which causes the images to appear in this post does not violate US copyright law.)
That argument makes no sense since it is just a statistical value. The wealthy person does earn every month of the year as well, and a lot more than most other people in absolute terms, even if after taxes it is less in terms of percentage of gross income.

Plus, beyond a certain, relatively low threshold income increases way too much relative to what the person actually deserves for their work. That is why there is that absurd income disparity that causes so many problems. Many get too much and even more get too little for their work.
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.


Closed Thread


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 08:42 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