The Classic Strawman: But 47% Don't Pay Taxes!

I agree, and thank you for the sources; I read certain things and consume a variety of media (so I'm generally aware of what's going on). But having links like these are helpful.

 

Still looks to me like everyone has benefited greatly. The bottom 20% makes 10% more than they did in 1980. The middle 40% is doing about 25% better. And it gets better as you go on up.

Everyone is getting richer and those who can compete in the information age are doing great!



What exactly do you see when you look at that graph? I see that the top 40% are doing about as well as the top 5% were in the 1950s. I'd say that means the middle class is doing pretty (*)(*)(*)(*) well.

The bottom 20% (young people working menial jobs) aren't doing so hot, but who cares.

 

You seem to have an interesting definiton of "all". No one is. Well okay. One out of one hundred people are. This is not what many people would call "all".

So you seem to believe that a government handout is fine for corporations who ship jobs overseas - but just leveling the playing field for actual US Citizens, is somehow "interfering with Liberty!" and other Libertarian pamphlet nonsense.

Want to explain how that makes sense?

 

You need to review the chart that was just posted. The chart irrefutably shows jhffmn to be correct. I would also point out that I do not believe that jhffmn is in favor of corporate bailouts, nor am I.

What both of us really rail against, though, is the Government meddling into the Free Enterprise system which creates the economic dysfunctions through which bailouts are expedient.

 

Interesting. I've seen government charts etc... that seem to contradict that one but maybe it's just one that I've missed. What is the source of this chart?

 

BLS.gov, IIRC - or the Census, like this one:

 

Another key for many people to remember is that - often - people make the emotional mistake of tying those squiggly lines on that graph to an individual.

Many individuals actually climb out of the percentiles charted by those squiggly lines as the decades go on. This is called social mobility.

So it isn't so much that "Bob the Poor Person" only had $X in income in 1950 - in 2007 dollars - and now he has $X+20%, so he's doing better...it's more accurate to say that those in those brackets at the same point in their lives decades ago were doing worse than the same sort of person in the same circumstance today.

 

Something is unbalanced in the tax system overall. A few graphs here isn't covering the issue. In my view, there should be no "lower" tax rate for those who are wealthy. Income should be taxed the same across the board (which very few exceptions).

What would be wrong with that?

 

I would certainly hope that you will give the answer the same kudos.

 

Something is wrong with the tax system. I admit that I'm not expert enough to explain it in some fully comprehensive way, but I will eventually.

 

After reading many of the posts here I can see that Barak Obama’s message of division and envy has appealed to many people.

We need four more years of that like we need a hole in our heads.

What good will envy do to change things? Envy changes nothing.

 

Not envy, a desire for fairness. Under Voodoo, the top 1% has doubled to quadrupled their wealth while the 99% and the country are slowly ruined..

And the poor pay more than Romney %wise in all taxes and fees, the middle class much more. The 47% thing is Pubcrappe spin...

 

Sorry I had to jump off and do a few chores…I’m a married man so doing chores for the wife is important…Happy wife happy life…Do you have chores that you do?...I wonder who is stuck doing the chores of those occupy wall street people?...Surely they have bills and so forth to pay…When we go on vacation everything seems to get backed up at the home front, what a mess but it’s worth it. Anyways, NO it’s not about fairness it’s about a president using people like you to get votes. It’s all about Barak Obama and has absolutely nothing to do with fairness. Using political rhetoric like fairness and class warfare has always appealed to second class citizens. It creates envy among the lower class. I’m surprised that young people haven’t realized that Barak Obama is talking down at them. Someday when you wise up you’ll think back at it all and laugh.

 

Well, what's really really bad about "envy" is it might motivate the masses to actually learn about the special low rax rates and loopholes the really rich get that make their tax rates lower than middle class families pay. And more of the middle class might be envious that the really rich get all these special low tax rates and loopholes.

Then if enough of them call their representatives, and vote in Democrats, Congress might actually close some of those loopholes and special privileged low tax rates the really rich folks pay.

Which would raise the amount of taxes the richest pay.

My God. Can you imagine anything more horrifying?

 

Yes I can imagine something more horrible. I can imagine a democratically controlled house and senate not doing a (*)(*)(*)(*) thing about taxes in 2008-2010 and libwipes claiming republicans are obstructing Washington.

Why all the envy now when the ship has already sailed. Oh yeah because it’s reelection time. Now we must pretend that Obama hasn’t been president for the last three years.

Smoke another one dude.

 

Because we can be sure that Mitt or Newt will keep 'em in line. Have another glass of champagne.

 

I pulled it from the first link in skeptik-f's list of links to "refute" me.

Anywho, the left has repeated the lie that the middle class is disappearing so often that you fools have taken it to be gospel truth. In reality, that narative is false. The poverty pimps have been peddling the lie that they are needed to protect the disappearing middle class for so long all of you just assumed it to be true.

You guys bought the politics of class warfare and envy hook, line, and sinker. I understand nothing I can say will shake your faith. Though it is funny for as "smart" as you progressives fashion yourselves to be, you sure are easily fooled.

 

Too much to address so I'll only address this part.

The rich do pay the highest rates.

Here are the effective tax rates:
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=456

Here are the numbers for 2007 (latest data available) for effective tax rate on individual income tax:
Top 1% 19.0%
Top 20% 14.4%
Second highest quintile 6.2%
Third quintile 3.3%
Fourth quintile -0.4%
Bottom 20% -6.8%


The more income, the more you pay in taxes. In fact, as your income increases, the deductions on Schedule A phase out so business expenses, charitable deductions, medical expenses, etc are not fully deductible.

Thats on W2 and income from a S Corp. Long term capital gains are taxed at 15%. The extreme upper income levels (maybe the top 0.1%) get most of their income from investments which are in the 15% rate.

That top 0.1% such as Bill Gates and Buffet have options. Gates put his money into the Gates Foundation, and while they do good work, I'll bet the foundation pays Gates as well as covering his travel expenses and other goodies. Its a way to divert income into more tax friendly avenues.

Buffet, who refuses to release his tax return so his claims can be verified, probably has some nifty tricks as well which he doesn't want known.

Buffet claims he paid 17.4% in 2010, which seems slightly low but reasonable given his major income is investments. He and his secretary Debbie Bosanek say she pays 35.8%, which is BS.

Buffett is backing way off his claim that the tax code is unfair.

http://www.omaha.com/article/20120127/NEWS01/301279949/672

As many suspected, the claim that his secretary pays 35.8% in federal income tax was a lie. The 35.8% is the total of federal income and payroll tax, they won't say if that includes employee payroll tax or both employee and employer. In any case, either she is way up in the top 1%, or she is an idiot in doing her taxes, or she has some sort of odd tax situation.

Or Buffett is simply a liar. I think thats the most likely option.

So, you have been the victim of a big smear campaign that the rich - defined as those making more than $250,000 - don't pay taxes. Its a lie. Don't fall for it.

 

Mitt only pays 14%.

Your figures only include less than half the federal taxes people pay and therefore is not accurate.

Mitt only pays 14%.

So how is 15% billionaires, trust fund babies, hedge fund managers and Mitt Romney that live off investments greater than the up to 35% rate working people pay, plus FICA on top of that?

Irrelevant.

Prove it is BS. A single person making over $83,000 is paying a 28% rate on income above that level, plus 7.7% FICA taxes. That is a 35.7% rate.

"I'm saying she is being treated unfairly in the tax code, as are tens of millions of others, compared to me," Buffett said. "They shouldn't change the rates on all the other people. They should change mine."

Buffett stuck to his long-held contention that it's unfair for high-income people to pay low tax rates, such as his own 17.4 percent in 2010, less than half Bosanek's 35.8 percent rate. That rate is for everything Bosanek pays to the federal government — income taxes as well as payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare.

Doesn't sound like he is backing away from anything, to me.

As I have shown above, it is very likely that his secretary is paying a 35+% rate of tax on her top income.

But I'm not surprised you'd say that. Buffet has committed the primal sin: Suggesting the richest should pay more taxes, or at least the same tax rates as people who earn their income.

Big strawman. No one claimed that people making over $250k don't pay taxes.

 

For arguments sake, lets suppose the rich pay 100% of the taxes, with the poor and middle class paying absolutely nothing. If the average income is $49k, and 30% is the average amount of all taxes taken out, that would mean an extra $14,700 a year or $1.2k a month. Now honestly ask yourself what you would do with that extra grand each month?

The reality, IMO, is that the only major difference between the "rich" and the "middle class" is self control...

This "tax the rich more" crap is a nothing more than a political campaign designed to appease the "dumb" masses who foolishly assume that that rich paying extra taxes will make their individual lives better...

The ONLY way to lessen the tax burden on the middle class is to get our government spending under control. If the "rich" actually controlled the government, or in any way made their wealth off it, it would be running like a well oiled machine, not a dysfunctional money pit.

This whole "rich holding down the poor/middle class" class warfare bologna becomes even more ridiculous when you consider who benefits from the poor and middle class having more disposable income... The rich want you to have and spend more money, cause that basically equals more money in their pockets.

Giving more money to the government is a bad investment, the rich get rich from AVOIDING bad investments... Think about it.

 

There is a huge difference between middle class and the 1%. If you had lived in both you'd know.

 

People don't pay the actual rates due to the deductions and credits. What people actually pay is the effective tax rate, which is the amount of tax they actually pay divided by their income.

To actually pay 35% of your income would require an almost infinite income. Nobody pays 35%.

That is why people in the lowest 40% have a negative effective tax rate. They receive a check from the govt due to the tax credits.

The figures I posted are accurate. Go look them up in other sites if you doubt them, just be sure you look up effective tax rates.


Buffett most certainly is backing off his claims. Claiming his secretary paid over 35% in federal income tax was total BS that everyone even remotely familar with the tax code immediatley recognized. When confronted by many people, he did a tap dance. Basically he lied about his secretary's federal income tax rate. He won't reveal her salary, and he won't reveal his tax return to prove he pays the rate he claims. He told a whopper and got caught.

You have fallen victim to the liberal smear campaign. Get educated. Don't be a victim.

 

People to only have investment income don't pay 15% either. So what.

That 35% is still applied as a marginal rate of tax on incomes that meet the criteria, whereas the 15% rate is the top marginal rate on investment taxes (unless its a short term holding).

I challenge that statement. Please prove that 40% have a negative effective tax rate. I don't believe it is anywhere near that high.

Why, you made it up and thus cannot back up your own claims?

Buffet hasn't backed off his claim at all.

Feel free to identify facts that you claim are false and prove it.

Otherwise you positions is so much unsupported blather.

 

People to only have investment income don't pay 15% either. So what.

That 35% is still applied as a marginal rate of tax on incomes that meet the criteria, whereas the 15% rate is the top marginal rate on investment taxes (unless its a short term holding).

I challenge that statement. Please prove that 40% have a negative effective tax rate. I don't believe it is anywhere near that high.

Why, you made it up and thus cannot back up your own claims?

Buffet hasn't backed off his claim at all.

Feel free to identify facts that you claim are false and prove it.

Otherwise your position is just so much unsupported blather.

 

Actually I rather do. We live quite happily off $50k a year, despite our mortgage, car loan, 4 teenage boys, eldest daughter's college tuition, and those "pesky" payroll taxes. My husband of almost 20 years has worked 3 jobs to buy everything we have today, despite my 90's tech investments.

Anyway, I would ask what relevance that has on my point?

According to the census reports under like $20k is poor and over $250k is rich, everyone else is "middle class." If you theorize that the angst is because the rich make so much more than the middle class, then shouldn't the lower middle class rise up against the upper middle class? After all those upper middle class folks are making 12 times what the lower middle class folks make...