Top 3% of Taxpayers paid majority of income taxes in 2016.

Reminds me of those who claim the workers should run the company and manage its assets instead of the people who own it.

 

While talking about taxes we should note that our system allows people who pay no taxes to get large tax "refunds." Is this fair? I was shocked when I once prepared a tax refund for someone who paid no taxes yet got a $13,000 EITC "refund." Everyone who votes should pay taxes IMHO, i.e., have some skin in the game.

 

I think the goal is to tempt those with less stuff to believe the richest people in the United States, who by a very large percentage are liberal, will be penalized if only everyone votes for liberal candidates.

Call it a political power play.

 

The goal of the modern day progressive (as was always the case with commies) seems to be to destroy the middle class. What shocks me is that liberals who claim to be educated think the economy is a zero sum game, ergo any successful person exploits the people to become successful. Liberalism is a good belief system for those who fail in life, i.e., they are not failures, rather they are exploited by the man.

 

The wealth is always redistributed to the state and its corrupt political ruling class.
The masses get what splashes off the rim of the target onto the floor.

 

That can't be true.
For if they truly are smart, they'd be getting refunds like Kushner, instead of paying taxes. They have the money to subvert the system, just not the brains, I guess.

 

This will always happen in a Progressive Tax system. This thread comes around yearly with the same circular arguments.

Want more people to pay taxes? Lower the cut off point. Heck, add a 'lowest' tax level at something like .5% or 1%.

Otherwise, this is the system that's in place.

 

From what I can tell, many conservatives, figure the only thing we primarily need federal income for is to spend it on wars. It is called national defense today, but given we are rather loose with what terms mean these days, it amounts to financing the standing military, the world police force, plus any new wars that we start. So, 800 billion in revenues would perhaps finance the status quo war mongering and military but the next war would be in the trillions and hence the debt would begin to grow again.

Conservatives generally want extremely low taxes, with the rich paying the same rate as the lower middle class, and some even want the min wage income taxed at the same rate as the rich. Because their political beliefs and even personal values are different from even an old liberal like myself, along particular lines. I respect those beliefs, those values although I may not agree with all of them. They are not bad people, just look at this world differently. And in some areas, I share their beliefs, their values. But not when it comes to taxation, tax rates, and what taxes are used for.

And america has always had these two groups of americans, and in the past because we once understood the value of compromise, we were able to live in relative harmony with two views of the world being espoused by americans. Neither side hardly ever got exactly what they wanted, but this did not cause the kind of hatred one sees today in these modern times, where it is "either my way, or the highway!". And that if someone does not share your world views, they are evil, nefarious, etc.

I happen to believe some of the conservative beliefs are not in the interest of the common good, and create problems, some insolvable unless a different approach is taken, which would demand some serious looks at particular ideological driven beliefs. But the same is true of the other side. I see many things coming from the modern left that is as destructive as some of those particulars on the right side.

I think that for the older liberals, versus conservatism, we see progressive taxation that finances an expanded Commons as something that intelligence would do. And all too often this is met, coming from the right side, an opinion that these things create an unhealthy dependency upon taxpayers, those who work, for their income, and will insure that more and more people who are lazy, not motivated, will be parasites, in growing numbers on those who live productive lives. Leeches. And no doubt there are plenty of people who will do just that, but the trouble comes in when the right colors all of these people with the same brush. That all of them are as they perceive them to be and there is only black and white involved. I don't think reality evidences that at all, and yet they do honestly believe that their black and white perception is fact, is the truth. But as long as they hold that view, of course they will stick to their guns, given they are feel their perception is truth, is born of hard fact. But given I have known both kinds of people, those that meet the perception the right seems to have of the poor, but also people who do not fall into that perception, this observation of reality of course informs me that the right side is badly wrong in their perception, and wrong to use a one size fits all blanket.

And the fact is, if you use taxes, for a Commons, that provides a safety net for the low IQ poor, and depending upon how intelligent the system in place tries to address the hard fact there are lazy, con men, in all areas of existence, there will always be a percentage of people who will game the system, in order to be unproductive, lazy, etc. But getting rid of a Commons just because this happens is not intelligence at all. It is reactionism. And all too often you see this kind of reaction from conservatives, in regards to this issue.

They have even equated the very ancient system of taxation in order to serve the general welfare and common good, as little more than thievery. As if a nation that taxes and uses that for the betterment of the nation and her People, is no different than common theft. A crime. And perhaps immoral as well. And yet it is one of the things that has defined civilization, and without it, who knows what kind of civilization we would have without the idea of taxation and how it is used to benefit the nation, a People, over an individual.

I could go on and on, and expand this, but my post is already too long. I wish I could speak in bumper sticker slogans, be tremendously laconic, but don't have that ability.

I believe fully in progressive taxation, in using taxes from the non poor to finance a Commons, that involves many things, that is better left to the public sector, and not included in the private sector driven by maximization of profits at any and all costs, for some things transcend and supercede profit, and are so important as to reject the notion that personal profit must be realized. Like our Common Defense from invading enemies who seek to conquer us, make what is ours, theirs, or to destroy us. Like a decent, sufficient social safety net for the various poor, whether caused by lower IQs or a capitalism that puts profits over all else, even the nation and her People, and a Common Defense against disease, sickness and ill health. These are things that if you inject the profit motive for a few into it, you get problems in being able to provide these things, in the interests of a Commons. A Commons would include all of these things along with education. For all of these things are more important than some people growing their personal wealth, by using such social needs as an opportunity to become rich, or richer.

The right holds a different belief and view on this issue, as well as the taxation that is demanded in order to provide these things. And old liberals like me of course disagree with them strongly, but at least I can understand why they believe as they do. I think they are flawed thinkers, and perhaps have their own little disconnect with what reality is, as people suffer from the same flaws and disconnect on the left side as well. I don't think they are intentionally immoral people, those on the right side, but sometimes it appears that the modern left rejoices in immorality more than those on the right, but granted, my own perception may be flawed when it comes to this moral issue, and the left versus the right.

 

Yes, the economy today is different which is why we need modern updated policies to ensure growth for workers. Corporate profits are far higher today then then but the difference is that workers used to get most of the economic growth and incomes were rising. Today the rich get most of the growth and wages are stagnant. This means that our policies are failing to really help our citizens. Today, the middle class is shrinking and for many cost of living is rising faster than wages. The middle class is in trouble, and we need to bring back growth to workers.

 

I don't know that corporate profits are "far higher" than they were then and workers are an expense. If a worker wants to enjoy the "profits" of a business then they can invest in the business. Their wages and salaries are expenses, profits come after expenses. Wages are not stagnant and in fact they are increasing as market forces become effective. Trying to increase the well being of the middle class through tax system income transfer schemes is folly.

 

How self-serving that you get to define conservatives and the argue against what you claim about them which is fundamentally false on it face. Pretty much reading the rest of your post not worth the time.

How about the fundamental question asked.

If the numbers in the OP are not fair and progressive enough what numbers do we have to get to make it fair and the higher earners paying enough of the tax burden?

• The top 1 percent paid a greater share of individual income taxes (37.3 percent) than the bottom 90 percent combined (30.5 percent).
• The top 50 percent of all taxpayers paid 97 percent of total individual income taxes.
• • In other words, the bottom 50 percent paid 3 percent. Which small percentile of tax payers also paid 3 percent or more? You might have guessed it. It is the top 0.001%, or about 1,400 taxpayers. That group alone paid 3.25 percent of all income taxes. In 2001, the bottom 50 percent paid nearly 5 percent whereas the top 0.001 percent of filers paid 2.3 percent of income taxes.

 

This is exactly what Trump has been saying and trying to do since he took office.

 

Americans need to realize the Dems want to raise your taxes, so you pay more and the lower 50 percent will pay even less, be more dependent, and a bigger drain.

 

Not Allowing!!! Keep in mind that on a global level, you are likely in the top 1%. How much of your own money should you not be allowed to accumulate?

 

This thread is littered with economic illiterates who think our tax system exists to socially engineer "fairness" instead of fund the very limited functions the Constitution spells out for the Federal govt.

 

Well said.

 

Corporate profits are higher than they were, much higher. You said that wages and salaries are expenses, but wages and salaries are the whole point of the economy and we can't treat them as something to minimize to maximize growth for the rich. Remember, the point of the economy is to maximize the earnings of workers. You claim that wages aren't stagnant but there is a mountain of evidence they are stagnant over the long-term when you factor in the rising cost of living we face.

Now, lets address investing in the business. Most working families e.g. a factory worker earning $40,000 per year simply can't invest a lot because they are paying their mortgage, trying to afford healthcare premiums, and just trying to make ends meet. At best most families can invest about 10% but the wealthy easily invest over 80% of their massive incomes which is one reason most of the growth goes to the rich. In addition, as I said before hourly salaries are stagnant which limits how much people can invest.

Two solutions are to adjust taxes as I said before so that workers can keep more of what they earn. I'd also transition social security to more of a tax-payer funded investment account. I'd also require a higher share of employer contributions to 401k so that people will be able to afford retirement and see their wealth grow as the economy improves.

Here are some graphs for your reference:

 

And I applaud Trump for finally focusing on growth. The problem is that most of his growth has gone to the rich and wage growth has been slow even when the economy boom and corporations are growing well. The key is to grow the economic pie, which Trump wants to do, but then make sure that this growth is broad-based and not just going to the top.

 

The rich will always outpace every other category for gaining wealth. Always. Still Trump has made significant progress in getting more money back to the taxpayers, both rich and poor and has been working hard to rebuild manufacturing which will lead to a growth in the Middle Class. Trump could be doing better if he gets the trade war settled with China, however, I think China and the US are on a collision course for war and it's been slowly simmering for quite a few years. That is something every President has had a hand in.

But, yes, the rich always get richer faster.

 

I am highlighting the absurdity that is the flat tax system.
It significantly benefits the rich (besides the Kushners of the world) and would devastate the poor.

 

Always? They didn’t prior to the ‘80s

 

The vast majority of Trump's tax cuts went to big corporations and the rich. The middle class did get a bit but thats because of the government borrowing. The rich are getting richer faster, and I am actually fine with that as long as it doesn't result in stagnation for workers. Currently there is stagnation so we need to adjust taxes so that workers get some of those gains.

 

and what did those corporations do with all of that money? Hint: Unemployment rates are the lowest in decades.

Also:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/mone...boosted-pay-since-tax-bill-passed/1023848001/

 

I never said that nor do I think that. “Value” can be created through trade making the economy positive sum.

I am talking about income inequality which can exists alongside a positive sum economy.

 

See.

You think the purpose of taxes is social engineering to inforce equality.