Why do people keep bringing this up? If you want to hear people b — about amazon then start a thread that says “speaking of Amazon…” instead.
Personally, I don’t see the “evolving” of the world to be a matter of anything but human agency. It’s not a “natural force” over which conscious, reasoning humans have no input or control (Unless, of course, they see it as something over which they have no input or control in which case it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy). I am a “prosumer” (proactive consumer) because I think it all matters and is not the outcome of some natural force. I actually think that being a prosumer is as much my duty as a citizen as is civic engagement. As a citizen, I won’t just roll over and take it. So why should I as a consumer? I won’t always “win” in either case. But I won’t just remain silent in the face of what I think is problematic.
No doubt, greed is OK. But those who enjoy the greatest benefit from the free market should pay the greatest cost to support the “system.” If the “system” sputters and unemployment increases there must be a back stop funded by those who have accumulated wealth.
Fundamentalists enjoy using the Bible to justify their agenda. I am often curious how those fundamentalists can so easily ignore the Bible when it contradicts them. When there were 7 years of plenty the excess was accumulated and later distributed during the 7 years of famine. The priests and bankers and speculators weren’t given control and allowed to buy low in the lean years and gouge the hungry or let them starve during famine. Was Joseph instructed to have 20% of the crops taken in a “socialist” manner. Imagine that. I wonder what Pat Robertson would have to say about that.
Today millions work and their total wages are less than a few bankers and speculators earn and those bankers and speculators pay half the tax rate of the workers.
"those bankers and speculators pay half the tax rate of the workers. "
Here we go again. Nonsense:
So higher income folks on average pay much higher % taxes than lower income folks, as it should be. And that’s %, $ are way higher for the higher income. Are there some exceptions? I’m sure there are, but on average this holds.
@texases
Agreed. But, by your own chart, even changes that seem minor to some make a huge difference in the ability to accrue more wealth. Each major drop in tax rates for the upper income brackets, results in a bigger gap between the haves and have nots. Since the last change in higher income tax rates, many more people in the middle class have seen their real income drop. That is not a coincidence. What the chart does NOT SHOW is the actual income difference between the upper and lower levels and the actual amount of taxes paid.
While the median income can be $46k, the top 1% income which has seen a 121 % growth since a reduction in their rates, now makes more then $300 k more per year than the median income. . What people don’t get is…this money does not trickle down as much as the middle class has to pay up, just to survive. Many of these high wage earners receive wealth from the middle class in areas like ihealthcare, energy cost etc. that are not figured into the cost of living index that the middle class and low wage earners and welfare recipients use to increase their wages and check size …if at all. Skewed from both ends ! The haves continue to grow at an alarming rate and the continual reduction in income tax rates ( among other things)only serves to increase it, while the middle class remains stagnant and the lower wage earners fall farther behind.
Btw, they are only the rates on their taxable income and not the actual amounts paid. Their actual income may not be taxable as often happens when those at the top are paid in other ways …in managed tax havens unavailable to the rest of us. I would not be surprised if the actual income of the upper 1% were much, much higher then reported to the IRS in wages subject to the income tax.
The Forbes 500 wealthiest dont pay “income” tax. They pay CAPITAL GAINS TAX. Even I know that and I’m a barely literate red neck auto mechanic in Mississippi. Please show the graph on that @texases.
Oy. texases, are you really going to make it out to be this simple? Come on. If you want people to deal in “facts” then deal in more than a simplistic snapshot that you then smugly take to be some kind of slam dunk. First, as dagosa mentioned an official tax RATE doesn’t tell you very much about what really happens. Do you suppose the bottom 50% is full of people hiring accountants?
Second, Warren Buffet was not kidding about his secretary. There are lots of sources of “income” and not all are taxed at the same rate - so tons of those “bankers and speculators” are paying very low rates on capital gains and their incomes from ordinary wages is sort of just their beer money. Once again, do you suppose the bottom 50% has all sorts of capital gains on their returns?
If you want to actually have a conversation, then have one. Don’t just post a chart that says little (without source) and scoff.
No smug, just facts. Those aren’t tax rates, those are the average taxes paid divided by total income = percent. You can (like I did) get the facts by income group from the IRS web site.
I’m not surprised that Warren Buffet pays less taxes, he’s just about the smartest investor in the county. But the “Top 400” in the plot above pay much higher average rates than the bottom 50%. Obviously a significant percent is capital gains, that’s why their tax rate is lower than the infamous “Top 1%”.
It’s so easy to dismiss with ZERO facts to back you up. But worthless.
Your charts are all about the taxes on high salaries, @texases. Buffet and Romney don’t earn a salary. And the charts also conveniently ignore FICA. But then when a chart is needed to downplay the Pentagons budget the FICA will be added, of course.
That GOP/Faux Nooox shell game is quite convincing.
What bout FICA, @texases? Where did that get lost?
And yes. capital gains is 15% and the wealthiest Americans pay that rate on any money they are unable to shift to a foreign account. Every dollar of earned income has a total 15.5% FICA tax on it plus the tax rate on your chart. That was ignored on your chart. Why do you ignore that?
I have paid Federal income taxes at a 42% rate and I have been far from wealthy all my life. Why was I robbed to pay the Pentagon budget when people earning hundreds of $millions pay 15%?
My 42% rate and the high rates paid by millions of hard working Americans support the federal budget and are the basis for tax charts that are based on selected facts to further an agenda. If I fill a few pages with charts that cherry picked data to support the left and throw dirt on the right will that change your mind. Probably not. Your cherry picked chart certainly didn’t give me any reason to rethink my opinion.
@texases
The tax rates on income published by the IRS are only accurate for the real income of those who cannot take advantage of tax loopholes…guess who ? For the high income earners, it’s bogus. You and I know it. Warren Buffet knows it. It’s no big secrete ! Now, let’s all support those in govt., and there are plenty, who want the capital gains tax rate to be zero. That will really help put the screws to the middle class.
@dagosa: It’s actually jn the teens when you count both halves and medicare. They “hide” this by showing your “gross” pay AFTER they take some of the tax out. I wish they’d just show gross pay before employer contribution…easier to see how badly we’re taking it.
Any 47% malarkey that ignores the impact of payroll tax is a (deliberately) distorted picture. (But, I’m not a tax attorney, and I could be perceived as being wrong by some for lacking third-party accredidation of my knowledge.)
@meanjoe75fan
I was initially only discussing that tax, SS, which only goes to the base of $117k. After that, wage earners pay no more tax. So it is a lower percent of higher income earners. I do not include other taxes like Medicare because that is charged for your entire income. Regardless, the declared income that is taxable of the top 1% is much less then it actually is. You and I both know it.
Yeah but Im scratching why you left out the employer half of SS…acting like it’s not a tax paid is “smoke and mirrors”…only thing it impacts is the size of your gross pay that you never see.
Smoke and mirrirs… Shell games… Dog and pony shows… Like reality television, politicians offer US spectacular episodes to entertain and appease US, featurng faux support for various high profile constituencies. But the highest priority for our statesmen is tipping the scales to favor the wealthy.
Government cintinues to pour $trillions into investment banks to pump up the markets. Doing so keeps the interest paid on savings down to near zero so those who have a nest egg feel foolish keeping their savings in CDs when “the market” will offer them a significant return. This has resulted in a generation of seniors who gravitate toward the Jim Cramer mind set. And that situation, though likely not foreseen and certainly not intedded, has and is used to push the markets higher and higher cheered on by seniors who would have their life savings in local banks drawing 5.5% if not for the phony market bubble inflated by the Fed.
How will this bubble end? Who will take the big hit when the bubble bursts? Does anyone think it will be the billionaires at the investment banks who get burned when the bubble bursts?
Why do people keep bringing this up? If you want to hear people b — about amazon then start a thread that says “speaking of Amazon…” instead.
Yeah, I wouldn’t want to cloud your discussion that started out bashing Walmart and has eventually evolved into a series of rants about fair taxation by talking about another company that sort of parallels the original topic. But carry on…
BTW VDC, they are experimenting with drones for some package delivery so I wouldn’t go all in just yet…
“they are experimenting with drones for some package delivery so I wouldn’t go all in just yet”
Yes, I have seen that coverage on the news, but somehow I think that drone delivery of packages is…many years in the future. Just imagine the first time that one of their drones takes down a powerline, or hits somebody’s child, or somebody’s dog, and winds up causing extreme damage, and possibly–deaths.
I envision a LOT of restrictions on that type of package delivery.
