I am the 53%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Instead of complaining that 47% don't pay taxes how about recognizing that 47% of working families are too POOR to have taxable income. If you want more people to pay taxes how about figuring out how to help them escape poverty rather than expecting them to pony up from their already meager earnings.

Actually a lot of those 47% can thank the Bush tax cuts - or do we forget that rates were cut for ALL taxpayers?

[Anonymous]

Hey, I keep reading about how little (relatively) money is raised by jacking up income tax rates to 100% on the top 5% of earners ... how much will be raised by requiring everyone to pay 5% on the first dollar (and removing the EITC).

[Anonymous]

My parents immigrated from Eastern Europe. Mom worked in a sweat shop and dad worked in a chemical plant, both making minimum wage. They paid cash for their house(s) (never would have qualified for mortgage), saved their pennies, and i went to my first choice college (first in the family to do so). I worked my ass off, but I am not going to pretend that I "deserve" anything I have simply because i had the fortune to be born to parents who taught me well, be educated (I am still paying my loans), and have a support network. So much about life is about luck. You posters who think that people who fall on hard times deserve their lot in life are living a very sheltered existence.

[Anonymous]

I am curious how much people end up really paying, and if they are willing to admit what they actually pay.

So for those who are sore over your tax burden, please share your income and actual taxes paid after deductions and or/refunds.

Would help me a lot to understand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was the poorest kid in my neighborhood. People laughed at my shoes because i had to reglue the soles until i outgrew them

I took my first job at the age of 11. My career started at the age of sixteen when I took my first job in my primary occupation.

I got into three ivy league schools but could not accept them because of family financial problems. I applied for and got a full scholarship elsewhere and took it. I worked while in school and lent money to my family. I graduated summa cum laude.

I am now worth several million dollars, all earned through hard work.

Tax me and the people like me. All of the above is true (maybe there was a poorer family but I didn't know them). But what is missing is this:

I was fortunate to have smart loving parents. I was lucky to get a break in my field at a young age. I was lucky to graduate into a good economy in the greatest country on earth. Chance favors the prepared mind but I am humble enough to know that plenty of prepared minds got bad breaks. My dad got bad breaks. He was the one who taught me everything I know about hard work.

So I am fortunate, and I can afford these taxes. I will step up and support them.

great post. Please voluntarily pay more taxes than you owe. You can pay as much as you like.

No, *you* pay the debt to society that you owe. The wealthy use a shit-ton more services than the poor. Those services need to be paid for. That's why our income tax is progressive.

[Anonymous]

This thread is hilarious. You can see what the tax burden is on someone with 25k income right? Sales or other taxes on almost every dollar in that figure. Gasoline? Tax. Telephone? Tax. Food? Tax. Clothes? Tax. Electricity? Tax.

The spin doctors have won again by getting all the over educated DCUMers to engage on a debate about the the fictional folks who "pay no taxes."

Warren is right.

[takoma]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is hilarious. You can see what the tax burden is on someone with 25k income right? Sales or other taxes on almost every dollar in that figure. Gasoline? Tax. Telephone? Tax. Food? Tax. Clothes? Tax. Electricity? Tax.

The spin doctors have won again by getting all the over educated DCUMers to engage on a debate about the the fictional folks who "pay no taxes."

Warren is right.

Speaking of Buffett, it looks like Cain's 9-9-9 would put Warren in the 47%, probably with most of the 1%:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/warren-buffett-likely-pay-no-income-taxes-under-215446867.html.

[Anonymous]

Quick note to the folks bitching about our historically low tax rates when "I made all my money myself through hard work and hearty individualism":


Progressive taxation is another name for the user's fees that rich people owe for the many, many services that the US Government provides to rich people. The value of those services grow correspondingly large as your personal fortune grows.

Don't want to pay them? Here's what you do: You take all the money that living in the US with it's existing legal and political framework enabled you to accrue. Then you send it all to the US Treasury. Then you move to someplace like Mozambique or Peru. Then you just go ahead and use your superior talent and stick-to-it-iveness to just rebuild your personal fortune without all the support of the US government and your fellow taxpayers.

If you don't feel this is a good deal, you're cordially invited to shut the flying fuck up you puling, unpatriotic piece of shit. Your attitude is an affront to every decent American who fought, died, and worked to build this country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is hilarious. You can see what the tax burden is on someone with 25k income right? Sales or other taxes on almost every dollar in that figure. Gasoline? Tax. Telephone? Tax. Food? Tax. Clothes? Tax. Electricity? Tax.

The spin doctors have won again by getting all the over educated DCUMers to engage on a debate about the the fictional folks who "pay no taxes."

Warren is right.

Not sure that I would call "I shouldn't have to pay any taxes cause poor people don't pay any" followed by "You are an uninformed piece of shit trying to weasel out of the maintenance fees you owe to the greatest country history has every known" a "debate".

[Anonymous]

takoma wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is hilarious. You can see what the tax burden is on someone with 25k income right? Sales or other taxes on almost every dollar in that figure. Gasoline? Tax. Telephone? Tax. Food? Tax. Clothes? Tax. Electricity? Tax.

The spin doctors have won again by getting all the over educated DCUMers to engage on a debate about the the fictional folks who "pay no taxes."

Warren is right.

Speaking of Buffett, it looks like Cain's 9-9-9 would put Warren in the 47%, probably with most of the 1%:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/warren-buffett-likely-pay-no-income-taxes-under-215446867.html.

Because your link was essential to understanding this, but your intro was a bit confusing: the Yahoo link asserts that Buffet would pay about 1.1% of his total income if the 999 plan were to go into effect.

[takoma]

Anonymous wrote:

takoma wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is hilarious. You can see what the tax burden is on someone with 25k income right? Sales or other taxes on almost every dollar in that figure. Gasoline? Tax. Telephone? Tax. Food? Tax. Clothes? Tax. Electricity? Tax.

The spin doctors have won again by getting all the over educated DCUMers to engage on a debate about the the fictional folks who "pay no taxes."

Warren is right.

Speaking of Buffett, it looks like Cain's 9-9-9 would put Warren in the 47%, probably with most of the 1%:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/warren-buffett-likely-pay-no-income-taxes-under-215446867.html.

Because your link was essential to understanding this, but your intro was a bit confusing: the Yahoo link asserts that Buffet would pay about 1.1% of his total income if the 999 plan were to go into effect.

After mentioning the 1.1% estimate that an accountant named Labant had come up with, the article added:

A tax rate of 17 percent is significantly higher, of course, than a tax rate of 1 percent. But even a tax rate of 1 percent is likely too high of an estimate, Labant's calculations suggest. Cain's 9-9-9 plan allows individuals to deduct charitable contributions, and Buffett's charitable giving almost certainly exceeded $4.9 million.

If that's the case, as it appears, then Buffett would have paid no income taxes at all last year under the plan, Labant said.

From that came the title of the article "Warren Buffett would likely pay no income taxes under Cain’s 9-9-9 plan" and my assertion that it looked like he's become part of the 47% who pay no taxes. The comment about the rest of the 1% was, I admit, an assumption.

[Anonymous]

"47% of working families are too POOR to have taxable income"

Who made that decision? We should be taxing the poor more to make an incentive to stop being poor and do something.

[Anonymous]

People who get taxes less should be the people who are the least burdens to society and provide jobs and other things that people consume. If anything the people who don't produce anything should be charged money to live in our society. Reward winners, fail failers!

[Anonymous]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WBLnj2iTqw&feature=player_embedded#![/youtube]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is hilarious. You can see what the tax burden is on someone with 25k income right? Sales or other taxes on almost every dollar in that figure. Gasoline? Tax. Telephone? Tax. Food? Tax. Clothes? Tax. Electricity? Tax.

The spin doctors have won again by getting all the over educated DCUMers to engage on a debate about the the fictional folks who "pay no taxes."

Warren is right.

so assuming they spend almost everything they earn (fair assumption unfortunately), that still probably means there tax is 5-7%. Hardly crushing and not my 21% effective rate.