American Presidency Campaign

skaltezon · 01-25-2012, 11:31 PM

.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop

Quote:

Looking just at income tax, the share paid by the top 1% of earners in America rose from 28% in 1988 to 40% in 2006.

Pardon me, but when 1% of the populace pays two-fifths of the income tax... they are doing their part.

^ ^ Quoted from The Economist at Taxing the wealthy: Diving into the rich pool | The Economist .

What The Economist doesn't say is that the top 1% of earners owns 34.3% of the country's wealth, which makes their 40% contribution in taxes seem a lot less onerous.
Wealth Distribution

Quote:

Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop

Quote:

[I]n 2009, according to a memo from the Joint Committee on Taxation, a bi-partisan Congressional committee, only 49 percent of Americans owed money on their Federal income tax returns [source: PolitiFact].

So 49% of the populace pays nothing! Hurrah for tax deductions for being old, having kids, etc....

^ ^ Quoted from HowStuffWorks at HowStuffWorks "Is it true that only 53 percent of Americans pay income tax?"

Conversely, the bottom 40% of the population owns way less than 1% of the wealth, which probably explains why they have no money to tax.
Wealth Distribution

.

blastingas10 · 01-26-2012, 03:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skaltezon

.

^ ^ Quoted from The Economist at Taxing the wealthy: Diving into the rich pool | The Economist .

What The Economist doesn't say is that the top 1% of earners owns 34.3% of the country's wealth, which makes their 40% contribution in taxes seem a lot less onerous.
Wealth Distribution

^ ^ Quoted from HowStuffWorks at HowStuffWorks "Is it true that only 53 percent of Americans pay income tax?"

Conversely, the bottom 40% of the population owns way less than 1% of the wealth, which probably explains why they have no money to tax.
Wealth Distribution

.

True.

Guybrush · 01-26-2012, 03:44 AM

To me, talking general principles, it seems naive to believe that wealth distribution is something you achieve with capitalist right-wing politics.

TheBig3 · 01-26-2012, 08:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tore

To me, talking general principles, it seems naive to believe that wealth distribution is something you achieve with capitalist right-wing politics.

True free-market capitalism allows for the creation of systemic barriers for emerging businesses. If you want a "free market" generally, you need something out there to preserve the chances for new or small businesses to get into the game. That's what government should be for. Its why we have anti-monopoly laws.

The idea that removing regulation will achieve anything other than piss-broke workers and new robber-barons is to ignore history entirely.

hip hop bunny hop · 01-26-2012, 08:34 PM

Skaltezon, wealth =/= income. Further, not all income is taxed the same.

Quote:

The median net worth of households headed by someone 65 or older was $170,494. That is 42 percent more than in 1984, when the Census Bureau first began measuring such data broken down by age. The median net worth for the younger-age households was $3,662, down by 68 percent from a quarter-century ago, according to the Pew analysis.

Quote:

Social Security benefits account for 55 percent of the annual income for older-age households, unchanged since 1984. The retirement benefits, which are indexed for inflation, have been a consistent source of income even as safety-net benefits for other groups such as low-income students have failed to keep up with rising costs. The congressional supercommittee that is proposing cuts has been reviewing whether to trim college aid programs, such as by restricting eligibility or charging students interest on loans while they are still in school.

LINK

In other words, the elderly tend to be more wealthy than the young. Further, because (1) social security is partially tax exempt (as stated in the prior Economist article), and (2) because the income tax is more severe on income derived from working as opposed to certain types of investment, their income tax rate can be lower as well.

LINK

...not only do the elderly tend to be the wealthier the young, have a preferential tax rate, they are the single largest recipients of the two largest entitlement programs in the USA (Medicare [$485b] & Social Security [$761b]).

This behavior is called Rent Seeking (link), and it is a great example of the problem of “redistributing wealth” via the government – the wealth does get redistributed, and the overwhelming tendency is for it to go from poor to the rich.

skaltezon · 01-27-2012, 02:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hip hop bunny hop

Skaltezon, wealth =/= income. Further, not all income is taxed the same.

Wealth doesn't equal income, but it does generate income. Averaged out, 34.3 % of the wealth apparently generates an income that pays 40% of the taxes. It hardly seems like a disproportionate burden.

hip hop bunny hop · 01-28-2012, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skaltezon

Wealth doesn't equal income, but it does generate income. Averaged out, 34.3 % of the wealth apparently generates an income that pays 40% of the taxes. It hardly seems like a disproportionate burden.

The top 1% has 34% of the wealth. The top 5%, however, only has 22% of the income. So the taxes on income generated by wealth, for this group, is disproportionately heavy.

So, 22% of income = 40% of income taxes paid. And, mind, people in this thread are advocating raising this tax burden.

TheBig3 · 01-29-2012, 10:58 PM

Because they don't pay it.

Mr November · 01-31-2012, 05:15 PM

I would just like to say that despite Ron Paul being a great senator, he would make a totally mental (this means bad - which means not good...) President.

TheBig3 · 01-31-2012, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr November

I would just like to say that despite Ron Paul being a great senator, he would make a totally mental (this means bad - which means not good...) President.

...what?

Edit: Oh you're from Canada, I'll give you a pass. He's a congressman. Not a Senator.

01-26-2012, 03:44 AM	#253 (permalink)
Guybrush Juicious Maximus III Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Scabb Island Posts: 6,525	To me, talking general principles, it seems naive to believe that wealth distribution is something you achieve with capitalist right-wing politics. __________________ Something Completely Different

01-29-2012, 10:58 PM	#258 (permalink)
TheBig3 killedmyraindog Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Boston, Massachusetts Posts: 11,172	Because they don't pay it. __________________ I've moved to a new address

01-31-2012, 05:15 PM	#259 (permalink)
Mr November Music Addict Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Halifax, Canada Posts: 429	I would just like to say that despite Ron Paul being a great senator, he would make a totally mental (this means bad - which means not good...) President.