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.
These figures are so driven by a preferred status all I can do is laugh and then gather together my expensive shoes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buckhead_Broker
Obviously, my earlier post rankled the nerves of somebody so here it goes again!
Let's take a look at who REALLY pays the taxes in this country!
"The middle class is already unfairly taxed in comparison to the elite 'upper' class."
OK, fine. What would you consider a fair share? If the top 10% was earning 70% of all the income but only paying 58% of the taxes, that wouldn't be fair, would it? Well ... let's see what the figures show.
In 1993, at the end of the Decade of Greed, the top 1% were paying 28.7% of all taxes. They earned only 13.8% of all earned income. Oops! sounds like they are paying a bit more than their fair share, doesn't it? What about the top 10%? They were paying 58.5% of the income taxes but earning only 39% of the income. The top 50%? Paying 95.2% of the taxes, earning 85% of the income. The bottom 50%? Earning only 15% of the income but paying just 4.8% of the income taxes.
Update ... In 1996 the share of the income earned by the top 1% reached 16%. Remember: They're paying one third of all the taxes. So ... who is getting away with not paying their fair share? Looks like the bottom 50% to me ... not the evil, hated, mean, nasty, wicked rich.
And by the way, should it really bother you that a person can spend $4,000 on a pair of shoes? Think about it. If he has a net worth of $100 million that pair of shoes is in the same proportion to a guy with a $1 million net worth buying a $40 pair of shoes.
People, you need to get over the idea of condemning the producers in this country. If you don't have what they have, work for it! Don't tax them so that you can have it to.
These figures are so driven by a preferred status all I can do is laugh and then gather together my expensive shoes.
Clearly you are a socialist liberal.
OK, if you don't believe me, here are the numbers straight from the Congressional Budget Office:
An enormous percentage of taxes are payed by a minority of Americans:
The Top 1% of taxpayers pay 29% of all taxes.
The Top 5% of taxpayers pay 50% of all taxes.
The Top 1% of income earners (comprising about 1 million families) earn about 15% of the total income earned by all wage earners in the United States, yet they pay almost 30% of all individual income taxes.
Furthermore, the Top 1% are shouldering a roughly 50% higher proportion of the overall income tax burden than they did in 1977.
The argument most oft used against tax breaks are that they benefit only the wealthy. It is clear from even a cursory look at the numbers below that the 'wealthy' will receive the majority of any income tax reduction because they pay a disproportionately huge percentage of the income taxes! To structure a tax break such that those in upper income brackets are excluded would constitute nothing more than transfer of wealth from those who have it to those who don't (i.e. legal plunder.)
BTW, it's the lower income earners who typically are the greatest users of government services; schools, housing assistance, food stamps, free medical care (uninsured persons), etc. And there's a heck of a lot more of them there are wealthy people. When are they going to start paying for all of the services they use?
Looking at the tax base in this way doesn't suit me, but you have every right to share your POV.
When I think about taxes, I think about a person making $10.00 an hour who pays x dollars in taxes, and another person who makes $250.00 an hour and pays x taxes.
The person making $250.00 per hour clearly, in my opinion, has more discretionary funds and more shoes. - and that is whether they are paying more of the tax base or less.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buckhead_Broker
Clearly you are a socialist liberal.
OK, if you don't believe me, here are the numbers straight from the Congressional Budget Office:
An enormous percentage of taxes are payed by a minority of Americans:
The Top 1% of taxpayers pay 29% of all taxes.
The Top 5% of taxpayers pay 50% of all taxes.
The Top 1% of income earners (comprising about 1 million families) earn about 15% of the total income earned by all wage earners in the United States, yet they pay almost 30% of all individual income taxes.
Furthermore, the Top 1% are shouldering a roughly 50% higher proportion of the overall income tax burden than they did in 1977.
The argument most oft used against tax breaks are that they benefit only the wealthy. It is clear from even a cursory look at the numbers below that the 'wealthy' will receive the majority of any income tax reduction because they pay a disproportionately huge percentage of the income taxes! To structure a tax break such that those in upper income brackets are excluded would constitute nothing more than transfer of wealth from those who have it to those who don't (i.e. legal plunder.)
BTW, it's the lower income earners who typically are the greatest users of government services; schools, housing assistance, food stamps, free medical care (uninsured persons), etc. And there's a heck of a lot more of them there are wealthy people. When are they going to start paying for all of the services they use?
Looking at the tax base in this way doesn't suit me, but you have every right to share your POV.
When I think about taxes, I think about a person making $10.00 an hour who pays x dollars in taxes, and another person who makes $250.00 an hour and pays x taxes.
The person making $250.00 per hour clearly, in my opinion, has more discretionary funds and more shoes. - and that is whether they are paying more of the tax base or less.
That is not exactly true. Just because a person makes $250 per hour doesn't mean he has more discretionary income. What if his expenses equatee to $260 per hour. Again, this sounds like class envy, pure and simple. Take money away from the people who are the top producers and give it to the losers. Pathetic!
I ain't going to argue with you because frankly you don't know anything about me and have already made two suppositions--both of which are incorrect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buckhead_Broker
That is not exactly true. Just because a person makes $250 per hour doesn't mean he has more discretionary income. What if his expenses equatee to $260 per hour. Again, this sounds like class envy, pure and simple. Take money away from the people who are the top producers and give it to the losers. Pathetic!
Last edited by Waterlily; 05-12-2007 at 05:33 PM..
Reason: No insults please
What you people are saying about taxes is quite interesting. However I'd like to keep this on topic. This is the Retirement Forum. If you want to discuss taxes you are free to make a post on the Business and Finance forum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterlily
It's just starting to happen. Baby Boomers will be retiring by the millions within the next few years.
I am wondering if some cities or states will be minus a lot of population in the near future. Will there be lots of retired people moving south?
There is the work place issue as well. With millions retiring will we have enough workers?
What is your vision of the USA in about 10 or 15 years?
That is not exactly true. Just because a person makes $250 per hour doesn't mean he has more discretionary income. What if his expenses equatee to $260 per hour. Again, this sounds like class envy, pure and simple. Take money away from the people who are the top producers and give it to the losers. Pathetic!
Lemme tell ya what, Buckhead, I'm no loser. I served my country for 22 years and am now doing the job of my dreams; trucking. I bust my butt 55-70 hours a week. And I love it. But my military retirement helps subsidize the cheap freight that the rest of America gets no discount on. I have no problems with the men who started and run America's largest truckload carriers; the deserve to be rich because they've worked hard and succeeded in a tough, deregulated industry. But the other side of the coin is that they've also lied, stolen and cheated their drivers (and others) to do it. They've stuffed the pockets of the politicians to skew the laws and public policy in their favor (in many cases, to the detriment of everyone else) I get paid based on mileage that's anywhere from 5-10% less than I actually drive. I sit for free by the side of the road if my truck breaks down. Truck drivers are exempted from the Fair Labor Standards Act, which lets greedy carriers cheat us in more ways than I can count.
And wait 'til Mexican trucks flood into this country. AGAIN, the American people are going to bear the burden of the GREED of big trucking and big retail. Our security, wages, highway safety, small business and MANY other negatives will arrive with them.
I suspect that there's many things that you and I would agree on. I hate slackers, too. But this country , if we're not careful, will go into the friggin' toilet because most of the "top producers" care only about how they can make a quick buck, how next quarter's balance sheet or stock price looks and how they can make money off of someone else's "sweat equity". They don't give a dang about next year. Next decade or next century...
BTW, I LOVED that "60 Minutes" piece last Sunday; can't wait until the internet brings real estate commisions and fees down to the "Walmart Wage Reality" that too many Americans are "enjoying" now. That's LONG overdue...
I don't recall ever saying you were a loser. What I said is that to use the government's power to take money away from anyone in this nation who produces and give it to those who don't is pathetic. It creates a disincentive for those who produce not to work as hard and a disincentive for those getting the handout not to work at all - so everyone loses!
I don't disagree that the trucking industry is fraught with greed and political favoritism. But at least you are doing what you love - many people in this country can;t make that claim.
As far as the real estate biz going digital, it will, it is and it should. Not sure if that was intended as a potshot at me, but my business if fairly insulated from all of that as we are a specialty firm that requires a tremendous level of market knowledge and construction experience.
.If we continue to let corporate interests run amok, unchecked and unchallenged, the working middle class will soon be tethered to unrepayable debt, and another era of 'serfdom' will return.
I am also a baby boomer. We will be retiring within a year or two (sooner if my wife's job keeps getting worse). I am semi-retired now. We have a lot purchased and are ready to build a house when the time comes.
I disagree to some extent with your statement. It's true that the middle class is continuing to carry the bulk of financial responsibility, but I think that it is going to disappear completely if things don't' change. There will be the Rich and the Poor. No in between. This will a sorry country to live in at that point.
Unless the current political climate changes we, as a nation, are going to be in more trouble than most people realize. In addition to losing the BB workforce, the collection of taxes from corporations and the wealthy is also dropping. And it will continue to drop. This I know from firsthand experience.
No taxes collected from them means it has to come from somewhere. Go look in the mirror.
Take money away from the people who are the top producers and give it to the losers. Pathetic!
Like Paris Hilton and her crowd?
Skew the numbers anyway you want to. If I made $10 million a year I'd gladly give Uncle Sam 60% of it. Gosh, to have to get by on a meager $4 million a year? God I'd starve!
Waterlily, my apologies, but you know it's going to happen given the original subject.
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.
Back on Topic
However I'd like to keep this on topic. This is the Retirement Forum. If you want to discuss taxes you are free to make a post on the Business and Finance forum.
