Posts: 4,015
Threads: 153
Joined: Jun 2010
Posts: 15,666
Threads: 422
Joined: Feb 2009
Why do you need that article to define selfish?
Posts: 4,015
Threads: 153
Joined: Jun 2010
10-27-2017, 11:17 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-27-2017, 11:18 AM by Hugo. Edited 1 time in total.)
(10-27-2017, 06:18 AM)Hugo Wrote: This explains it fairly well.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/omb-to...le/2638746
Since no one wants to comment: Top 20% pay 95% of taxes
Quote:People always ask all the time, ‘Why do you want to give a tax cut to the rich?' Here's the math. We have a progressive tax system, which means that if you make $1 million and I make $50,000, we both pay the exact same rate on the first, let's say, $20,000. And then, from the next $20,000 up to my $50,000, and her next $20,000 to her next $50,000, we pay the same, I think it's 12 percent of 15 percent, I can't remember where the brackets are right now. And then she goes on to pay her higher rate on the stuff that she makes and I stop.
Well, if you want to give me, the middle class, a cut, take my 15 percent rate down to say 10 percent, and that gives the middle class a cut. Guess who else benefits from that, she does. She pays that same rate on the way up the brackets.
His conclusion, "You could sit there and do nothing but lower the rates on the middle class, and all other things being equal, you're giving the rich a tax cut.
Anyone want to claim the "rich" don't pay their "fair share"?
Posts: 41,857
Threads: 560
Joined: Mar 2009
(10-27-2017, 11:17 AM)Hugo Wrote: (10-27-2017, 06:18 AM)Hugo Wrote: This explains it fairly well.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/omb-to...le/2638746
Since no one wants to comment: Top 20% pay 95% of taxes
Quote:People always ask all the time, ‘Why do you want to give a tax cut to the rich?' Here's the math. We have a progressive tax system, which means that if you make $1 million and I make $50,000, we both pay the exact same rate on the first, let's say, $20,000. And then, from the next $20,000 up to my $50,000, and her next $20,000 to her next $50,000, we pay the same, I think it's 12 percent of 15 percent, I can't remember where the brackets are right now. And then she goes on to pay her higher rate on the stuff that she makes and I stop.
Well, if you want to give me, the middle class, a cut, take my 15 percent rate down to say 10 percent, and that gives the middle class a cut. Guess who else benefits from that, she does. She pays that same rate on the way up the brackets.
His conclusion, "You could sit there and do nothing but lower the rates on the middle class, and all other things being equal, you're giving the rich a tax cut.
Anyone want to claim the "rich" don't pay their "fair share"?
Some of the rich do not.
Posts: 14,339
Threads: 709
Joined: Jan 2011
(10-27-2017, 02:07 PM)tvguy Wrote: (10-27-2017, 11:17 AM)Hugo Wrote: (10-27-2017, 06:18 AM)Hugo Wrote: This explains it fairly well.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/omb-to...le/2638746
Since no one wants to comment: Top 20% pay 95% of taxes
Quote:People always ask all the time, ‘Why do you want to give a tax cut to the rich?' Here's the math. We have a progressive tax system, which means that if you make $1 million and I make $50,000, we both pay the exact same rate on the first, let's say, $20,000. And then, from the next $20,000 up to my $50,000, and her next $20,000 to her next $50,000, we pay the same, I think it's 12 percent of 15 percent, I can't remember where the brackets are right now. And then she goes on to pay her higher rate on the stuff that she makes and I stop.
Well, if you want to give me, the middle class, a cut, take my 15 percent rate down to say 10 percent, and that gives the middle class a cut. Guess who else benefits from that, she does. She pays that same rate on the way up the brackets.
His conclusion, "You could sit there and do nothing but lower the rates on the middle class, and all other things being equal, you're giving the rich a tax cut.
Anyone want to claim the "rich" don't pay their "fair share"?
Some of the rich do not.
Trump's taxes will be interesting.
Posts: 7,011
Threads: 441
Joined: Sep 2014
10-27-2017, 03:43 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-27-2017, 04:12 PM by Wonky3. Edited 2 times in total.)
(10-27-2017, 02:11 PM)Valuesize Wrote: (10-27-2017, 02:07 PM)tvguy Wrote: (10-27-2017, 11:17 AM)Hugo Wrote: (10-27-2017, 06:18 AM)Hugo Wrote: This explains it fairly well.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/omb-to...le/2638746
Since no one wants to comment: Top 20% pay 95% of taxes
Quote:People always ask all the time, ‘Why do you want to give a tax cut to the rich?' Here's the math. We have a progressive tax system, which means that if you make $1 million and I make $50,000, we both pay the exact same rate on the first, let's say, $20,000. And then, from the next $20,000 up to my $50,000, and her next $20,000 to her next $50,000, we pay the same, I think it's 12 percent of 15 percent, I can't remember where the brackets are right now. And then she goes on to pay her higher rate on the stuff that she makes and I stop.
Well, if you want to give me, the middle class, a cut, take my 15 percent rate down to say 10 percent, and that gives the middle class a cut. Guess who else benefits from that, she does. She pays that same rate on the way up the brackets.
His conclusion, "You could sit there and do nothing but lower the rates on the middle class, and all other things being equal, you're giving the rich a tax cut.
Anyone want to claim the "rich" don't pay their "fair share"?
Some of the rich do not.
Trump's taxes will be interesting.
I doubt we will ever find out.
Since the income tax was made law, the rich have always paid the lion's share of the tax burden. This is true in all industrial societies.
Conservatives who have read Edmund Burke (the father of modern conservatism) will understand why. He agreed with Liberal John Locke that only a "social contract" that provided essential social services would make society stable. The "rate" or "percentage" of taxes paid by the rich is not as important as the proportion.
It requires a certain given income to meet the basic needs of people. Anything more we call wealth. Wealth is of course relative and when income exceeds those basic needs by multiplies, the wealthy can easily bear the burden of paying the costs that keep societies stable. The wealthy are concerned with "want's" more than "needs".
But, most real wealth comes not from income but from investments of capital. Those taxes, while huge in amount, are not proportionitly high compared to the tax of earned income. (Wages and salaries)
The wealthy do not need "tax relief".
Hugo's post of the comments from the Washington Times is little more than an opinion piece couched as a news story.. Legitimate argument about our tax code and it's "fairness" would require volumes and even then political attitudes would influence it's result.
The real debate should be about the way our political leaders spend our money, more than the relative fairness of the tax code.
Posts: 18,298
Threads: 867
Joined: Mar 2011
(10-27-2017, 11:17 AM)Hugo Wrote: (10-27-2017, 06:18 AM)Hugo Wrote: This explains it fairly well.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/omb-to...le/2638746
Since no one wants to comment: Top 20% pay 95% of taxes
Quote:People always ask all the time, ‘Why do you want to give a tax cut to the rich?' Here's the math. We have a progressive tax system, which means that if you make $1 million and I make $50,000, we both pay the exact same rate on the first, let's say, $20,000. And then, from the next $20,000 up to my $50,000, and her next $20,000 to her next $50,000, we pay the same, I think it's 12 percent of 15 percent, I can't remember where the brackets are right now. And then she goes on to pay her higher rate on the stuff that she makes and I stop.
Well, if you want to give me, the middle class, a cut, take my 15 percent rate down to say 10 percent, and that gives the middle class a cut. Guess who else benefits from that, she does. She pays that same rate on the way up the brackets.
His conclusion, "You could sit there and do nothing but lower the rates on the middle class, and all other things being equal, you're giving the rich a tax cut.
Anyone want to claim the "rich" don't pay their "fair share"?
Maybe, the top 20% make 95% of the wealth, which would justify them paying 95% of the tax.
Posts: 7,011
Threads: 441
Joined: Sep 2014
(10-28-2017, 10:29 AM)chuck white Wrote: (10-27-2017, 11:17 AM)Hugo Wrote: (10-27-2017, 06:18 AM)Hugo Wrote: This explains it fairly well.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/omb-to...le/2638746
Since no one wants to comment: Top 20% pay 95% of taxes
Quote:People always ask all the time, ‘Why do you want to give a tax cut to the rich?' Here's the math. We have a progressive tax system, which means that if you make $1 million and I make $50,000, we both pay the exact same rate on the first, let's say, $20,000. And then, from the next $20,000 up to my $50,000, and her next $20,000 to her next $50,000, we pay the same, I think it's 12 percent of 15 percent, I can't remember where the brackets are right now. And then she goes on to pay her higher rate on the stuff that she makes and I stop.
Well, if you want to give me, the middle class, a cut, take my 15 percent rate down to say 10 percent, and that gives the middle class a cut. Guess who else benefits from that, she does. She pays that same rate on the way up the brackets.
His conclusion, "You could sit there and do nothing but lower the rates on the middle class, and all other things being equal, you're giving the rich a tax cut.
Anyone want to claim the "rich" don't pay their "fair share"?
Maybe, the top 20% make 95% of the wealth, which would justify them paying 95% of the tax. See that.
"Percentage of taxes"
Percentage: Parts of a hundred.
Maybe we should be concerned about the proportion of wealth taxed.
And maybe I should not even offer an opinion. This stuff is WAY above my pay grade and I'd bet it's above yours too.
I wonder: It there a study we might respect as valuable that presents an argument dovetailing with our individual feelings about the responsibilities of government.
THEN we could debate it.
Posts: 4,926
Threads: 34
Joined: Nov 2013
(10-28-2017, 11:30 AM)Wonky3 Wrote: (10-28-2017, 10:29 AM)chuck white Wrote: (10-27-2017, 11:17 AM)Hugo Wrote: (10-27-2017, 06:18 AM)Hugo Wrote: This explains it fairly well.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/omb-to...le/2638746
Since no one wants to comment: Top 20% pay 95% of taxes
Quote:People always ask all the time, ‘Why do you want to give a tax cut to the rich?' Here's the math. We have a progressive tax system, which means that if you make $1 million and I make $50,000, we both pay the exact same rate on the first, let's say, $20,000. And then, from the next $20,000 up to my $50,000, and her next $20,000 to her next $50,000, we pay the same, I think it's 12 percent of 15 percent, I can't remember where the brackets are right now. And then she goes on to pay her higher rate on the stuff that she makes and I stop.
Well, if you want to give me, the middle class, a cut, take my 15 percent rate down to say 10 percent, and that gives the middle class a cut. Guess who else benefits from that, she does. She pays that same rate on the way up the brackets.
His conclusion, "You could sit there and do nothing but lower the rates on the middle class, and all other things being equal, you're giving the rich a tax cut.
Anyone want to claim the "rich" don't pay their "fair share"?
Maybe, the top 20% make 95% of the wealth, which would justify them paying 95% of the tax. See that.
"Percentage of taxes"
Percentage: Parts of a hundred.
Maybe we should be concerned about the proportion of wealth taxed.
And maybe I should not even offer an opinion. This stuff is WAY above my pay grade and I'd bet it's above yours too.
I wonder: It there a study we might respect as valuable that presents an argument dovetailing with our individual feelings about the responsibilities of government.
THEN we could debate it.
Feel free to sit this one out if you want.
Posts: 7,011
Threads: 441
Joined: Sep 2014
(10-28-2017, 12:28 PM)Cuzz Wrote: (10-28-2017, 11:30 AM)Wonky3 Wrote: (10-28-2017, 10:29 AM)chuck white Wrote: (10-27-2017, 11:17 AM)Hugo Wrote: (10-27-2017, 06:18 AM)Hugo Wrote: This explains it fairly well.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/omb-to...le/2638746
Since no one wants to comment: Top 20% pay 95% of taxes
Quote:People always ask all the time, ‘Why do you want to give a tax cut to the rich?' Here's the math. We have a progressive tax system, which means that if you make $1 million and I make $50,000, we both pay the exact same rate on the first, let's say, $20,000. And then, from the next $20,000 up to my $50,000, and her next $20,000 to her next $50,000, we pay the same, I think it's 12 percent of 15 percent, I can't remember where the brackets are right now. And then she goes on to pay her higher rate on the stuff that she makes and I stop.
Well, if you want to give me, the middle class, a cut, take my 15 percent rate down to say 10 percent, and that gives the middle class a cut. Guess who else benefits from that, she does. She pays that same rate on the way up the brackets.
His conclusion, "You could sit there and do nothing but lower the rates on the middle class, and all other things being equal, you're giving the rich a tax cut.
Anyone want to claim the "rich" don't pay their "fair share"?
Maybe, the top 20% make 95% of the wealth, which would justify them paying 95% of the tax. See that.
"Percentage of taxes"
Percentage: Parts of a hundred.
Maybe we should be concerned about the proportion of wealth taxed.
And maybe I should not even offer an opinion. This stuff is WAY above my pay grade and I'd bet it's above yours too.
I wonder: It there a study we might respect as valuable that presents an argument dovetailing with our individual feelings about the responsibilities of government.
THEN we could debate it.
Feel free to sit this one out if you want. Good citizenship requires we engage. Sitting one out happens all too often.
Posts: 14,339
Threads: 709
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,103
Threads: 262
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 5,103
Threads: 262
Joined: May 2013
(10-27-2017, 02:07 PM)tvguy Wrote: (10-27-2017, 11:17 AM)Hugo Wrote: (10-27-2017, 06:18 AM)Hugo Wrote: This explains it fairly well.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/omb-to...le/2638746
Since no one wants to comment: Top 20% pay 95% of taxes
Quote:People always ask all the time, ‘Why do you want to give a tax cut to the rich?' Here's the math. We have a progressive tax system, which means that if you make $1 million and I make $50,000, we both pay the exact same rate on the first, let's say, $20,000. And then, from the next $20,000 up to my $50,000, and her next $20,000 to her next $50,000, we pay the same, I think it's 12 percent of 15 percent, I can't remember where the brackets are right now. And then she goes on to pay her higher rate on the stuff that she makes and I stop.
Well, if you want to give me, the middle class, a cut, take my 15 percent rate down to say 10 percent, and that gives the middle class a cut. Guess who else benefits from that, she does. She pays that same rate on the way up the brackets.
His conclusion, "You could sit there and do nothing but lower the rates on the middle class, and all other things being equal, you're giving the rich a tax cut.
Anyone want to claim the "rich" don't pay their "fair share"?
Some of the rich do not.
Some pay more, some pay less. But they as a group pay 95% of all the taxes paid, but for some people that isn’t enough. Of course those that don’t it is because of LEGAL tax deductions, the same deductions those that complain take when they file their taxes.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Posts: 22,606
Threads: 795
Joined: Jan 2011
https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/31/politics/...mOGrM3Q_xA
"Trump, top House Republican admit there's no chance of a middle class tax cut this year"
Surprise, Surprise!
Sent from my SM-G928V using Tapatalk
|