The rich don’t pay their fair share… they pay much more! [Reader Post]

Loading

There’s an old saying; A picture is worth a thousand words. Pie charts will likely never be confused with great art in terms of story telling, but they have a way of making complicated issues clear. Income taxes are one of those things that are naturally difficult to grasp and the issue is made that much more opaque because liberals love to obscure the facts.

One of the shibboleths of the left is that the rich don’t pay their fair share of taxes. One of the more amusing segments of the 2008 Presidential campaign involved Neal Boortz asking then Democrat hopeful Dennis Kucinich two simple questions:

  1. What percentage of total income is earned by the top 1% of income earners?
  2. What percentage of total federal income taxes are paid by the top 1% of income earners.

of all of the federal income taxes – according to Congressman Kucinich answered: He thought the top 1% of income earners earned 60% of the income and paid about 15% of the taxes. He was a little off. In fact, the top 1% of income earners earn approximately 17% of all the earnings in the country. That’s certainly higher than the 1% they represent of the population but a far cry from Congressman Kucinich’s 60%. More astounding however, is that they pay fully 39% a 2009 Congressional Budget Office report. The below chart demonstrates clearly the absurdity of the notion that the rich do not pay their fair share of taxes.

The first chart shows that the rich do indeed pay far more than their oft cited “fair share” of income taxes. Not only that, it also shows that the bottom 40% of wage earners actually have a negative tax rate and get money back from the government in the form of income tax credits!

Another of the left’s arguments is that the lower income wage earners pay a disproportionate amount of the Social Security / Medicare tax. That too is false. The second chart states that the top 10% of wage earners pay 43.5% of all social insurance taxes while the bottom 40% pay just 15%.

Why does any of this matter in the first place? The third chart (taken from a 2010 report from the Tax Foundation) demonstrates why…Jobs. It compares wage & salary, capital gain, and dividend income for all income earners. As you can see, for the 80% of income earners below $200,000 per year, wages (i.e. a job) make up almost their entire incomes. Without jobs that someone else creates they would have no income… except government transfer payments.

At the $200,000 and above level, business and dividend income starts to take off and by the $1,000,000 and above level the three are almost equivalent. Those are the telltale signs of success. Those people earning those $200,000 and above incomes are the people creating the jobs that employ most of the remaining 80% of the population.

Put another way, jobs are not created by wage earners. Jobs are created by entrepreneurs risking their capital to start businesses… And those entrepreneurs are the usually found in that $200,000 and above group. The businesses they start generate 65% of all new jobs created in the United States.

While the first two charts debunk the myth that the rich do not pay their “fair share” the above chart demonstrates why it matters: The rich are the ones starting small businesses and creating jobs and prosperity.

Myths die hard, particularly when their proponents willingly ignore the facts. The myth that the rich don’t pay their fair share should soon be headed the way of the global warming hoax. Clearly it is the people at the upper end of the income spectrum that are being treated unfairly. They are not paying their fair share… They are paying more. Not only are they responsible for 2/3 of all new jobs created, but in return they are rewarded with being allowed to keep even less of their income as they become more successful. Perhaps as more Americans examine and understand what it takes to generate and sustain a dynamic and growing economy the “tax the rich” cries will begin to fall on deaf ears. That’s exactly what America could use right now, a reinvigorated entrepreneurial class striving to put more money in their pockets… and generating millions of jobs in the process.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
179 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Ya know, I’m through talking about this stuff here…
1> Because some of you guys simply get off on the argument, NOT the truth, or end result of it!
2> Those smart enough to know what’s what, do, those who refuse to see it, NEVER will. Stay dumb!
3> Beating “who was wrong first” to death is a waste of time, and effort! What MATTERS is from here on!
4 Lastly, if nothing else…TWo simple Ideals say it all, I don’t care HOW many stories you cut and paste…they are..
A> One can NOT spend more than he makes, and not have to pay up! You are BANKRUPT at that stage.
B> Two wrongs will NEVER make a right!! Who was first, who cares. But REPEATING an error is DUMB!
C> For you Military guys… KISS! Keep It Simple, STUPID! This means less Feds, PERIOD! You place your faith in the Gov for everything, you sold your ass into slavery! We’re on the Brink, and you want more?
Think about it… have a nice day. I’m gone, got Horses to tend to.

TYPO!! should read ..””THREE simple Ideals””…. edit isn’t working…

@Greg:

Please tell us again how the $1Trillion in spending over 2009, leading to a deficit of $1.4Trillion was entirely Bush’s fault when the democrats held Congress.

Please tell us again how the 2010 deficit of $1.3Trillion was Bush’s fault, even though Obama had the WH for the entire fiscal year, and the democrats controlled both houses of Congress.

Please tell us again how the estimated 2011 deficit of $1.65Trillion is Bush’s fault, even though Obama is the President, and a third of the fiscal year Congress was in the hands of the democrats.

Please tell us again how it is the GOP’s fault for the spending, when they cannot push meaningful spending cuts through because the democrats in the Senate will not allow anything to be cut.

It isn’t taxes, Greg. It never has been. It is about maintaining governmental control over more and more aspects of our individual lives, and placing the cost for that control on our shoulders. The estimated federal budget for 2011 is $3.82 Trillion, while the federal revenues are expect to be $2.17Trillion. That is a $1.65Trillion deficit. By contrast, if the Bush tax cuts were allowed to lapse for those “rich” people you, JC and Luckless demonize, the deficit would still be $1.6Trillion or so. And on top of that, the economy itself would suffer due to less investment into markets that need the influx of investment dollars. That means lost business, lost jobs, and lost federal revenue, whether immediate or in the near future.

And yet, all you liberals want to do is demonize the “rich”, when the real problem is the size of government, on all levels, and the ever increasing spending that goes along with it. And to top all that off, you don’t want to cut the spending. You want the “rich” to somehow pay for it all, and more, because they make more than you. That is jealousy, and stupidity, and ignorance that fuels that thinking. It certainly isn’t fiscal responsibility.

The blame game can go back and forth, stretching back decades, for who is responsible. Guess what? We, the people are responsible for continuing to place inept, corrupt, power hungry politicians in office who aren’t looking out for our best interest, or the interest of the nation, but for their own selfish reasons. We have allowed the government to take more power than they are allowed by the Constitution. We have allowed the government to take more of our rights away from us. We have allowed the beast to feed, and your answer is to point at the guy next to you and tell the beast to feed on him instead of you.

Neither you, nor JC, nor Luckless have any idea what the true goals of the TEA party is. You simply put forth the same fear-mongering that your liberal masters shout out about them. They are racist. They don’t care about the middle class. They want corporations to have all the power and money. Really?! I guess being for the Constitution, and the founding father’s ideals, doesn’t appeal to you three. It makes me sad that ignorant stupidity can reign because of people like you.

The tea party was a rebellion against corporate subsidies. The corporation was called The East India Company. Your tea party defends corporations.

Why don’t you rich people go Galt? Oh yeah, because you need poor people to clean your toilets, and fix your toilets, and watch your kids, and build roads and cars and all that useful stuff.

I never demonized anyone. Seriously, get a grip on reality. Where did I demonize the rich? Where did I say they were evil? You are the second participant on this forum to try to put words in my keyboard. You defend the wealthy for taking advantage of loopholes and tax havens, but demonize the poor for taking advantage of any opportunity they can find, even when their very survival is at stake. You demonize the poor for simply fighting for their right to survive. You call them greedy — because when leaders call for sacrifice, they expect (how silly of them) everyone to sacrifice. But for some, the sacrifice is all one sided, and should come from those who have the least to give.

Good day, sir.

I never demonized anyone.

Hmm… this follows the comment of:

Why don’t you rich people go Galt? Oh yeah, because you need poor people to clean your toilets, and fix your toilets, and watch your kids, and build roads and cars and all that useful stuff.

If it’s not a form of demonization and an assault on people in general I don’t know what is. OH wait I guess having the assumption that someone who works a postion of Janitor is always going to be a Janitor or someone who flips burgers will always be stuck flipping burgers. In a pure Socialist or Communist system, that would be true.

But don’t delude yourself JC in thinking the various splinter groups of the modern day TEA party defends corporate subsidaries, as the likes of GE and Goldman Sachs has been given multi billion dollar benifits at the expensive of Tax Payers by Democrats and RINOS alike. Much to your chagrin, the bulk of them do not support Corporate benefits from the Government as that relates to higher taxations on the citizens (Hence the monkier Taxed Enough Already Party).

And here’s a bit of history since you seem a bit confused, the East India Company was not what you claim it to be. It was the target of the Boston Tea Party riot due to it being the company in holdership of warehouses of British Import Tea in contrast to your claim of them being “subsidized”, the actual taxes imposed onto the Colonial Citizens were imposed on all goods that were not British made or imported up to and including Dutch merchandise that was cheaper and in more demand due to being better quality. This threatened the British Empire’s economic grasp over the Colonies and thus the taxations were inflicted to force Colonial purchases of British goods. It back fired and lead to the infamous Tea Party of Boston that destroyed British warehoused goods and ultimately lead up to the Quaratine of Boston and confiscation of firearms of Colonists which helped sparked ultimate revolution. Demonization of the modern day TEA party groups as corporate stooges makes you look like a fool when they are not a centeralized party base but a fractured and disjointed entity by namesake alone. Wichita TEA party groups have little in common in policy goals in comparison to St. Louis TEA party groups when examined closer, with the only connection of demanding lower spending and a fair tax rate that doesn’t encourage migration of residents to another county or State.

And then we get this little bit that Illionis TEA members have been pointing about about higher corporate taxations:

http://www.wgntv.com/news/wgntv-caterpillar-leaving-mar27,0,2069753.story

The arrogance of the Govenor of Illionis shows how little he understands the situation and how more galvanized CAT will become to shut shop and relocate due to Government meddling in their Business at any level. If CAT does depart the State, a lot of honest people’s jobs are hung to dry due to Democrat tweaking around in places they don’t belong in. Much like the damages Congress Democrats did to Aerospace Industry that left about 10,000 of my counterparts unemployed up till today. Yes, keep barking up that tree that TEA Parties are for corporations, and see how quickly jobs can be kept when your heros act to kill that, “evil golden goose.” The damages of a business shutting down for Local and State Government will be high as citizens in the Local will face higher property tax rates next fiscal cycle of government action and local businesses could expect to carry extra burdens unless they shut down due to lack of clients that operated as CAT workers.

That’s not demonizing. That’s stating a fact. If you say I need someone to change the oil in my car because I don’t know how, or don’t want to do it myself, is that demonizing me?

No, if I said the rich are a bunch of greedy bastards who want to run this country into the ground and enslave us all, THAT would be demonizing. But I didn’t say that. Like I said, some of my best friends are rich. They know what I say is true.

Oh, and boo hoo on the corporate tax rate.
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Tax/ge-exxon-paid-us-income-taxes-09/story?id=10300167

You demonize people who work low income jobs and claim it as a fact? You demonize Johngalt and then claim it instead a fact? Hypocrite, I call thee.

The point is, most of the “poor” in this nation are in the state of childhood working a part time job between school and life. Granted some adults live within the poverty line but is it the Corporate greedy bastard’s fault for it or is it the own person in poverty’s fault for not seeking various training programs that exist in each Local community by Federal mandates since the 1930’s? As it stands I can get training from anywhere from medical examination equipment specialist (x-ray tech) to being a plumber (which entry base pay can be at about 60k a year). Any person without a felony can seek training to get a better job, it isn’t the Greedy bastard’s faults for the apathy and lack of intivative in a person in seeking a better job. Case in point I’m within a series of training programs myself to be more robust in the job market (a must in this economy). Failure to train oneself is not the Coroprate’s fault, as there are many programs offered up even by the State Government to get training.

And yes, boo hoo about that on Exxon and GE… wait, what’s this? What major political party was given large donations by GE and Exxon in 2008 elections? Oh would it be the Democrats? And who is the major poltical party setting in control of our US Federal Tax Codes? Democrats.

Sure sounds like those damn dirty TEA partiers are sure to blame for our Tax problems, bub…

Yes, the jobs are just sitting there — it’s all there, if only those lazy demon poor would take advantage of it.

Of course.

You are mean and boring.

@JC: JC aren’t you a little concerned that you never get anything right? The original Tea Party was about “taxation without representation”. That is a far cry from subidizing corporate business. It was a fenent of freedom. Are you writing the history books our kids are now studying?

Well, I don’t write textbooks, but here it is, in language that even a child could understand. Looks like educational material for homeschoolers. It was about corporate monopolies, and corporate subsidies. The British Government basically arranged it so that any tea that was NOT from the East India Company was taxed. They gave the corporation a tax break.

http://www.socialstudiesforkids.com/articles/ushistory/bostonteaparty.htm

It was another cold December night in Boston. The three British ships the Dartmouth, the Eleanor, and the Beaver were sitting in Boston harbor, their holds full of tea that wasn’t being unloaded because the angry residents of Boston were threatened not to buy or use the tea.

The anger was directed at the government of Great Britain, which at that time had passed the Tea Act, a law that almost guaranteed that the American colonists would buy tea from the East India Company. Why? Because the law lowered the price on tea that the East India Company so much that it was the cheapest tea around. In fact, it was way below the price charged by other tea companies. Most American colonists, looking for ways to cut costs and save money, would choose a cheaper tea over a more expensive tea any day.

Why did this law come about? Well, the East India Company wasn’t doing so well and the British government wanted to help the company get back on its feet.

Other tea companies weren’t happy about the Tea Act, of course, but the American colonists viewed it as another example of “taxation without representation”: In effect, the Tea Act was putting a tax on tea sold by companies other than the East India Company. As with the Stamp Act and other unpopular taxes, they were all voted in by Parliament, which was thousands of miles away, and the American colonists had no way to influence the law or speak out against it while it was being debated in government.

I see Greg has a a buddy that also hates and envies the rich. As usual they have only stereotypes and strawmen to justify their irrational hate and rank bigotry. What pathetic, small people.

@JC: The issue was taxation without representation. It was about freedom, nothing else. Spin it all you want JC, but the issue was lack of representation.

JC says: 158

Yes, the jobs are just sitting there — it’s all there, if only those lazy demon poor would take advantage of it.
Of course.

Well lets look at that for a minute….. If there ARE no jobs for the “poor” to do….. What are the ILLEGALS then doing?? I hear they “do the work Americans “Won’t Do”…. or is it the Work, America PAYS them, Via social programs,(welfare, section 8 etc etc) NOT TO DO! 11 to 20 MILLION Illegals are here, “making it”… yet the “poor little Poor Americans CAN”T”???? or WON’T! I call BS on you here!! This is a VERY Complicated subject, but the FIX is available, if the Socialists will STFU and let us implement it! You cry foul too easily…. And “rich” is a state of mind…. I live a GOOD life here, but Currently, do it on less than 1200 a month! And I’ll bet I’ve way more “cool stuff” than you! Sometimes, SMARTS can overcome “CASH”!! Kwit cher Whinin’…….

Oh by the way, this “poor”.. unemployed for over a year guy, is on the verge of a comeback, starting our own from home business!! If one applies himself MORE than he whines about how evil the Big bad World is… ANYONE, can do ANYTHING! LOL!
Also, MY family came here in the LATE 50’s.. penniless….started from ZERO! We now live on our PAID FOR farm…. with the lake we had put in, two houses on it…all cars, trucks, tractor,atv etc paid for…telling you this, not to “brag”.. but to ask, if WE could do it, why can’t YOU, who’ve been here WAY longer than US do it?? I was the firstborn of our Family here in 1958… and I too, am debt clear…. so, what’s YOUR excuse, with the head start I KNOW you had, for NOT being so? No self Discipline? Not willing to self sacrifice for a time, to succeed in the end?? Not willing to WORK your ASS OFF?? WHAT?? We did it, and we never took Gov aid…why can’t YOU??

JC said….”Well, the East India Company wasn’t doing so well and the British government wanted to help the company get back on its feet.”

Well since all other Tea was MUCH higher than theirs, why didn’t they just raise their prices a bit, to get solvent then?? Instead of ASKING BIG GOVERNMENT for a TAX solution???? 200 plus years have gone by.. and some have not learned a DAMN THING!! LOL!!

@JC: I would also point out that many of your Tea Party members are collecting SS and Medicare, both programs that are responsible for keeping many of our elderly from eating dog food for the past five decades.

Well duh… do they have a choice? Ever heard of a lawsuit called Hall v Sebelius? I did a post on this a few months ago.

Sorry to hear you’re female. It’s because of those like you I have to defend myself against conservative male friends who, somewhat tongue in cheek, love to remind me that giving the women the vote seemed to coincide with the move for the US to socialism (i.e. the entitlement ponzi schemes you love)

Thanks for nuttin’….

JC: I’m tired of you — and your kitchen sink. You try to deflect everything. When I point out that the GOP has held congress for the past 12 years, you go back to the 1940s to attack FDR. You seem a bit unhinged. Shall I tell you of the sins of Herbert Hoover?

Call me back when our participation in Libya reaches 1.2 trillion dollars. And several thousand dead Americans. Not that I ever mentioned Libya. Not that I said I supported it. I never said that. You are arguing with ghosts to avoid arguing with me.

Ahhh… the ol desperate bait ‘n’ switch tactic. And this after my first response to several embarrassing diatribes. LOL First it tries to argue it was GOP majority (almost, since 2001-03 was an even split) for 9 Congresses that is responsible for the accumulated debt of the US, the bulk of which even the lib/progs, who possess more sanity than hormones, admit is the entitlement programs. Started, of course, in 1935. That is why I started my timeline there.

What part about the observation of the idiots who believe the world began and ended with the Bush presidency didn’t you get?

But I shoulda known not to go over the head of the disadvantaged in brain power.

ta ta, JC. Hope you’re still cute enough to get a sugar daddy. You sure ain’t got the smarts to be much more than an Obama welfare recipient.

@Randy, apparently JC is so young she has the PC version of US history as her source. Heaven help her children if she home schools, and this is her source.

I do think that “taxation without representation” may be a concept beyond her capabilities of grasping. You might want to try to lower the level of communication.

@MataHarley: Mata, I know socialists fail to understand that those who came to this country sought freedom. They had a certain amount of freedom here. They wanted to have a say in their government like those citizens in England. Instead, they were treated as vassels and taxed with out any representation in the government. That is what the current Tea Party is about. This administration has over stepped its authority given to it by the people. Now, the Tea Party wants to bring “big” government back into line with the founding principles. The Tea Party movement is that simple. That is why the simplicity scares socialists like JC who wants to live on other people’s money. Yes, they are rewriting the history books. Haven’t had a reply from JC yet. Must looking for another spin!

Gosh darn, Randy… you sure give JC a lot more credit for thought capability than has been demonstrated. I think that’s extraordinarily kind of you. I’m impressed.

The sheer volume of whining from greg and jc is unbelievable. The world isn’t fair, waahhhhhhh! Envy, greed, selfishness, self rightousness, elitism, and authoritarianism is what those two stand for.

@JC: You said:

I never demonized anyone. Seriously, get a grip on reality. Where did I demonize the rich? Where did I say they were evil? You are the second participant on this forum to try to put words in my keyboard.

Here you said:

If a CEO is highly paid, and does a poor job, they get ousted (with a HUGE ASS compensation package) and then they run as a Republican (Meg Whitman, anyone?) Every asshole banker on Wall Street?

And here you said:

Don’t worry, my self-esteem doesn’t come from arguing with you punks.

And here luckless dazzled us with his brilliance when he said:

@JC Don’t bother trying to convince these greedy pigs that that the rich don’t pay there far share because there greedy minds can’t comprehend that FACT.

To which you readily agreed here:

Life, you are right. I’m done with this.

So I guess you have in fact demonized entire swaths of the American public.

You also said:

Yes, Bush cut taxes for everyone. If you are in the middle 20%, that amounted to $791 in 2010.

According to the article you cite a full three quarters – 75% of the tax cuts went to families making less than $73,000.00 a year.

In fact, the Washington (Com)Post, clearly a far left rag in the middle of one of it’s many rants against Bush states that the Bush tax cuts did NOT cause the economic mess we are in:

Although the cuts were large and drove revenue down sharply, they are not the main cause of the sizable deficit that exists today. In 2007, well after the tax cuts took effect, the budget deficit stood at 1.2 percent of GDP. By 2009, it had increased to 9.9 percent of the economy. The Bush tax cuts didn’t change between 2007 and 2009, so clearly something else is to blame.

The main culprit was the recession — and the responses it inspired. As the economy shrank, tax revenue plummeted. The cost of the bank bailouts and stimulus packages further added to the deficit. – Source

When the debate on whether to extend the current tax rates put in place by Bush, CNN said:

The Tax Policy Center estimates that a married couple with two kids under 13 and a household income of roughly $75,000 could end up paying about $2,600 more in federal income taxes next year than they would if the tax cuts were extended. –Source

You really hate anyone who has wealth, that much is clear. You state that you are a very good teacher, a professor who routinely receives awards. That is good, but I hope for your students’ sake, you do not pollute y our classroom with your far left, Marxist ideology.

@JC:

The tea party was a rebellion against corporate subsidies. The corporation was called The East India Company. Your tea party defends corporations.

Well, the history part has already been taken care of. Sounds like someone needs to have an American History refresher course.

As for the TEA Parties of today, I don’t believe they defend corporations.

“We the people” will save Liberty and Freedom in America.
………………….
And you also are going to continue to bail out selected companies from their failures so you can maintain government control over them in the future.(speaking about what government has done)
……………………..
Now it’s our turn. Now we are going to prove to you who really runs this country………the PEOPLE!
………………….

http://www.theteaparty.net/inner.asp?z=6

According to many media accounts, the people supporting the Tea Party movement are radical right-wing racists or ultra-religious ideologues, but being a natural skeptic and conservative, I decided to see for myself. Imagine my surprise when I showed up at a local farm house for my first meeting with the Greene Tea Patriots and found something completely different!
Who are these Greene Tea Patriots? They seem to be normal people you would meet in the course of an average day. They all have normal jobs. They are machinists, engineers, housewives, factory workers, contractors, printers, farmers, and entrepreneurs.
……………….
Everyone seemed to have their primary hot button topics, but all seemed to agree that over-taxation, massive government spending, and increasing regulation of our lives has gone too far.
…………….

http://greeneteapatriots.org/Editorials/whoare.htm

The Tea Party Patriots stand with our founders, as heirs to the republic, to claim our rights and duties which preserve their legacy and our own. We hold, as did the founders, that there exists an inherent benefit to our country when private property and prosperity are secured by natural law and the rights of the individual.

http://teapartychicago.netboots.net/node/1

We’re concerned about reckless overspending, unfair and punitive taxation, and the increasing lack of government constraints.

http://houstontps.org/?page_id=2

Is there anything within the quoted text, or at the sites themselves that discuss defending corporations? No, there isn’t. And I could continue to link and link and link to numerous other sites and you could peruse their mission statements or info pages and no where would you find the defense of corporations. That is a leftist, liberal lie propogated by the liberal rags like HuffPo or DailyKos or the MSM. Try doing your own research, from the horse’s mouth’s next time, instead of relying on liberal diatribe. It might just wake you up to the fact that the liberal machine is using you.

Why don’t you rich people go Galt? Oh yeah, because you need poor people to clean your toilets, and fix your toilets, and watch your kids, and build roads and cars and all that useful stuff.

-One, I am not rich. Far from it. I hold a middle-class job.
-Two, if the rich ever did “go Galt”, much of society would collapse as jobs would go away, investment dollars would go away, and much government revenue would go away.
-Three, many of those “rich” people you demonize(said it again, didn’t I) are the ones who started their businesses from scratch, doing the manual work themselves. Many of them still know how to “fix toilets, watch children, build roads and cars and all that useful stuff.”

I never demonized anyone. Seriously, get a grip on reality

Really? Let’s look back, shall we?
Post #8

I would also point out that many of the rich came to their riches through inheritance. They aren’t this “golden class of producers” that you like to imagine.

Post #22

And as for money as an incentive, if it worked to make people better at their jobs, why do the bankers seem so crappy at theirs, and why do they get bonuses?
……………
And wouldn’t it be better for the economy (and capitalism) overall if millions of people could shop for reasonably-priced shoes, rather than a few heiresses paying stupid money for one pair?

Post # 47

I’m talking about the richest of the rich, and their hoarding of money.

Post # 48

We should respect the wage-earner, because he makes the money that makes the rich rich.

Post # 50

If you bankrupt him, you are a stupid rich capitalist sitting on a pile of unsold widgets, watching your fellow citizens starve.

Post #57

While all the possessions of the rich are evidence of their superiority.

Post #59

But the ones who are making the real money, on Wall Street, are not making money from either of those things, but from manipulating, and gambling on, and skimming profits from the transactions of people making real products and providing real services.

Post # 64

And in the last several decades, they have run amok, hoarding money, creating giant ponzi schemes, and all the while taking taxpayer subsidies.

Post #78

If a CEO is highly paid, and does a poor job, they get ousted (with a HUGE ASS compensation package) and then they run as a Republican (Meg Whitman, anyone?) Every asshole banker on Wall Street?

Post # 126

Yes, who is greedy?
http://www.economist.com/node/319862
Oh, and just in case you all don’t know, JP Morgan Chase is not the U.S. Government. They plotted to steal from their customers, and now the customers plot their downfall. That’s called capitalism.

In all of those statements within your posts, you are demonizing the “rich”.

You defend the wealthy for taking advantage of loopholes and tax havens, but demonize the poor for taking advantage of any opportunity they can find, even when their very survival is at stake.

I have not done anything you accuse me of doing in that statement. I stand on a principle that what a man(or woman) earns, through his/her labor, is their own property. To take more and more from those who make the higher incomes is not “fair”, no matter how you look at it. I have explained many times that this taxation discussion is stupid when we are faced with such reckless spending.

The Bush tax cuts? We gained many jobs from those, as others have pointed out. And, the cuts themselves added to federal revenues from individual income taxes the year after the last part was enacted.

The extension of the “rich” part of the Bush tax cuts was claimed to cost over $600Billion over a decade. In a static economy with a static GDP, that translates to roughly $60Billion/yr. That is a drop in the bucket when we are discussing deficits of well over a Trillion dollars. And the figures I used aren’t even correct because we are not in a static economy, don’t have a static GDP, and taxes are not a “cost” to government in the first place. Those tax cuts allow many people to keep their jobs, many others to get some kind of wage increase, and still more people another choice in the marketplace. Quit talking about the Bush tax cuts as if they were bad. The way you liberals are, you still won’t be happy when 75% of the wage earners aren’t paying any income taxes and the burden is nearly entirely on the “rich”.

But let’s get to your last comment, shall we?

But for some, the sacrifice is all one sided, and should come from those who have the least to give.

If you had followed anything I have said, or followed other similar topics and my comments there, or even just thought about my FA name, you’d realize that “sacrifice” plays no part whatsoever in my views when it comes to government and fiscal matters. It does for liberals though. They want the “rich” to “sacrifice” more and more of their property, for the good of all.

To sacrifice means to give up something for the sake of someone else, as far as how liberals apply it. So who is collecting those sacrifices? The people who lecture others, or force others to “sacrifice”? He who is collecting that sacrificial offering is forcing servitude upon those doing the sacrifice. Slaves and masters. I am no one’s master, and certainly not anyone’s slave. I sell my labors to the company I work for, for what I deem a reasonable pay. If it weren’t, I wouldn’t sell my labors there, but rather, find another employer who provides me a better trade on my labors. The money I send to the government, and the money you send, whether we like it or not, is forcibly taken from us, for if we don’t send it, we are penalized either with fees and monetary penalties, prison, or both. When I feel it is a fair amount, I don’t complain. When I feel they are taking too much of my property, compared to the compensation I receive in the form of roads and other services provided by the government, I will stand up and fight against it. I do not care what my neighbor pays to the government, or doesn’t pay. That is no concern of mine, nor should it be a concern of yours.

The US Constitution, Amendment 14, states that all citizens shall have equal protection under the law. So I ask you, is our tax code equal? Should the resultant be equal, or the application of it? If the resultant, then we are no longer following the founding father’s ideals set forth in the Declaration nor the Constitution, where all shall have equal opportunity. No, the application is what should be equal, however, the application of it certainly isn’t equal either when one considers the different deductions and credits that apply to some but not to all. In short, the entire tax code, from individuals to businesses is not equally applied. But your discussions on taxation aren’t grounded in the Constitution, nor the words set forth in the Declaration. Your discussions seek to destroy those freedoms and liberties that many hold near and dear, and fight for daily.

It isn’t the “rich” or wealthy you should be fighting against. It’s a government that sets unfair conditions, seeking control over individual lives, and snuffing out freedoms and liberties every time you turn around. Don’t demand other citizens be forced to pay more and more. Demand, instead, that government be forced to spend less and less. You have no more right to someone else’s income or wages than they do of yours, so quit demanding it from them. Demand, instead, that government be forced to apply true equal protections under the laws, from the smallest wage earning individual to the biggest corporation. That is the only way to ensure that true fairness and equality will reign.

Ah, the silence from JC is deafening…

🙂

I got bored with you slave morality. Here is something you should read:

It’s the Wealth Gap, Stupid

I would also point out that by focusing on Income Taxes you are ignoring about 90% of the tax system.

@JC: I’ll see your leftist website and raise you one youtube video.

Check it out, JC, that is if you are truly interested in the truth.

With these articles thrown in to boot:


Data overlook upward mobility

–and–

Policy Analysis: Has U.S. Income Inequality Really Increased?

Watch the video and read the articles, and we can have a discussion on them.
.
.

@JC: ‘There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.” Mark Twain (Samuel Clemmens for those of you on the left!)