| Subject: Re: WHO PAYS WHAT TAXES … THE LATEST |
Author:
Rootbeer :o)
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 15:01:54 01/19/02 Sat
In reply to:
Rootbeer :o)
's message, "Re: WHO PAYS WHAT TAXES … THE LATEST" on 14:33:50 01/19/02 Sat
Uhmmm...sorry. I seem to be loosing my minimal typing skills....that should be:
It gets so biG, not bit.
Rootbeer :o)
>Okay...so I understand what you're saying about who is
>paying more and who is paying less. My point was that
>now that the balance of who is paying more and who is
>paying less or nothing has balanced out to a 50-50
>level, doesn't it make sense that the top 50% have a
>better chance of swaying policy and enacting what you
>and Mr. Roark would say is a more equitable tax
>distribution, than if the top percentage of tax payers
>was only say..20% or 30%. See what I mean? The voting
>percentage is more equal now than it was before.
>Rootbeer :o)
>
>>> That's the whole point Rootbeer. It ain't a 50/50
>>proposition any longer. In other words, it has been
>>reduced to class warfare. What is middle income?
>>According to this:
>> Data on federal taxes from the two leading sources
>>of tax information for Congress — the Congressional
>>Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation —
>>indicate that the federal tax bite on families in the
>>middle of the income distribution is smaller than it
>>was four years ago. Families with incomes of
>>approximately $40,000, for example, would be paying
>>about $580 less in 2001 than they would have paid if
>>they still were paying the same percentage of income
>>in federal taxes as in 1995. Tax burdens on these
>>families have declined by an amount that equals about
>>one percent of their income.
>>
>>Now if the middle income folks are paying less who is
>>making up the difference? We already know that those
>>on the lower end are falling off the tax rolls
>>completely and the rates at the bottom end are
>>dropping. That leaves the evil rich, of which I am not
>>a member, but whom I will gladly defend, to foot the
>>bill.
>>Therein lies Mr. Roarks contention.
>>
>>
>>Can't say it ain't so...but I can say that there was
>>>some "mention" of these figures on Disney's ABC news
>>>recently. Can't say exactly what day it was but I do
>>>remember that it was spoken out loud on the air. For
>>>what it's worth.
>>>
>>>So now explain why it is if the top 50%'s tax rates
>>>keep going up, the top 50% don't do something about
>>>it? If 50% are getting tax breaks and 50% are getting
>>>tax broke, then they should be on equal footing to
>>>butt heads about evening it out.
>>>Rootbeer :o)
>>>
>>>>The latest numbers are out … these for 1999 … on
>just
>>>>what segment of our population pays what share of
>our
>>>>income tax burden. As columnist Bruce Bartlett puts
>>>>it, this is excellent anti-class envy material.
>>>>Over the years there has been a steady progression
>in
>>>>the shift of the responsibility for the payment of
>>>>federal income taxes to high-achievers. As I have
>>>>told you countless times, this is all according to
>>the
>>>>plan. The plan to shift the entire responsibility
>>for
>>>>the payment of federal income taxes to a minority of
>>>>the taxpayers. This, of course, leaves the
>>>>class-warfare party, the Democratic Party, free to
>>>>soak the rich minority, who pay all the taxes, for
>>the
>>>>benefit of the lower and middle income majority,
>>which
>>>>pays virtually none of the income taxes. A sure
>>>>vote-buying formula.
>>>>OK .. here’s the latest from Bruce Bartlett’s colum.
>>>>For some historical reference Bartlett points out
>>that
>>>>in 1975 the top 1 percent of income earners in this
>>>>country paid about 18.7 percent of all federal
>income
>>>>taxes. Keep that figure in mind.
>>>>Now .. the figures for 1999. The top 1 percent of
>>>>income earners now pay 36.2 of all federal income
>>>>taxes. For those of you who attended government
>>>>schools, that’s over one-third. This is double
>their
>>>>share of the tax burden from 1975. If you have any
>>>>brains at all you will want to know just what share
>>of
>>>>total income this top 1 percent earned. After all,
>>if
>>>>they’re earning 36.2 percent of the income then they
>>>>should be paying 36.2 percent of the income taxes.
>>>>That would only be fair, wouldn’t it? Well, the
>fact
>>>>is that this evil top 1 percent of income earners
>>only
>>>>earned 19.5 percent of the income in 1999. As
>>>>Bartlett points out, their share of the income taxes
>>>>exceeds their share of the income by almost 17
>>>percent.
>>>>Now for some other income-earning segments.
>>>>If you’re in the 5 percent of income earners your
>>>>share of the income taxes paid went from 36.6 to
>55.5
>>>>percent from 1975 to 1999. The top 10 percent saw
>>>>their share increase from 48.7 percent to 66.5
>>>>percent. If you’re in the top 25 percent you’re now
>>>>paying 83.5 percent of the income taxes. In 1975
>you
>>>>paid 72 percent. How about the top half? Your
>>share
>>>>is now at 96 percent. The bottom half pays 4
>>percent.
>>>>Guessing game. Of all the segments I mentioned
>>above,
>>>>which segment saw their share of the total income
>>>>taxes paid actually go down in the last 25 years?
>>>>You’re right. Only one segment. The bottom 50
>>>>percent.
>>>>Another question. Which segment listed above has an
>>>>income share that exceeds their share of the income
>>>>taxes paid? Again, only one. The bottom 50
>>percent.
>>>>When these figures first came out in 1975 liberal
>>>>Democrats in congress denied them. They refused to
>>>>believe the figures could be correct. They demanded
>>>>that the Congressional Research Service develop the
>>>>correct figures. After their own study was done,
>>they
>>>>found the figures were true.
>>>>These figures never fail to amaze those who actually
>>>>see them. Unfortunately, the vast majority of
>people
>>>>in this country don’t listen to talk radio and don’t
>>>>study Treasury publications. So, since these
>figures
>>>>certainly aren’t going to be featured on ABC News or
>>>>Entertainment Tonight --- most people will never
>>know.
>>>>Bottom line? The evil, hated rich most certainly
>are
>>>>paying “their fare share” of the taxes and are
>richly
>>>>deserving of a tax cut. Just try to say it ain’t
>so.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 