The Reaganomics Fraud:

[Mr. dB]

Yeah, the top 1% of earners pay 40% of all taxes of the and the top 10% pay 70% of the taxes. Oh, and 47% of Americans pay zero taxes.

And how is that a subsidization of the ultra-wealthy? How much of a burden should the top 1% carry? 50%? 60%? 90%?

If the top 1% of earning entities are earning 40% of all the earned income, then how is that tax burden not commensurate?

As for the personal question, how is it germane?

As for the 47% number, which I doubt, even if it's true, I think it's indicative not that too many people are getting a free ride, but a damn shame that so many people are doing so poorly that they QUALIFY for the free ride.

 

[PICK3]

Put me down for the free ride.

this nose to teh grindstone method ain't working for me no more


just sayin'

 

[EnderJE]

Put me down for a fair share. I still like the flat idea, but I realize that it won't get traction.

 

[EnderJE]

This reminds me. I've got to buy some Vibrams.

 

[mrplunkey]

If the top 1% of earning entities are earning 40% of all the earned income, then how is that tax burden not commensurate?

Because the top 1% are in a bracket that is at a 250% higher rate than the bottom payers, and 47% pay nothing. If paying taxes are such a good idea, everyone should play the same flat rate.

As for the personal question, how is it germane?

It's completely germane and I will continue to ask it. At this point I'm convinced you've never participated in the top bracket. But that sure doesn't stop you from wanting those people to give you more. Let's set aside the economic theories. Let's set aside the political rhetoric. What we're looking at here is a guy who wants more free shit. You're on the brink of cashing in a soon-to-be-insolvent social security system and a medicare system that pays $3 out for every $1 paid in. So even though today's workers are stuck supporting a ponzi scheme that benefits you, you're here telling the 1% who pay 40% of the bill that you need more money from them.

As for the 47% number, which I doubt, even if it's true, I think it's indicative not that too many people are getting a free ride, but a damn shame that so many people are doing so poorly that they QUALIFY for the free ride.

That's what happens when you declare war on the companies and individuals that create jobs. And until we have president who understands that, more and more people will "qualify".

 

[RottenWillow]

Yeah, the top 1% of earners pay 40% of all taxes of the and the top 10% pay 70% of the taxes. Oh, and 47% of Americans pay zero taxes.

And how is that a subsidization of the ultra-wealthy? How much of a burden should the top 1% carry? 50%? 60%? 90%?

And I've asked this of you before: How many years did you spend in that top tax bracket? As someone whose career may be winding down, have you been part of that 1% locomotive that's pulling the load? Did you make it into the top 10% maybe?

I suspect that figure must include retirees who already paid their pound of flesh for 40 years. Probably also includes people collecting SSDI payments, which is money they paid into the system.

 

[75th]

I suspect that figure must include retirees who already paid their pound of flesh for 40 years. Probably also includes people collecting SSDI payments, which is money they paid into the system.

Or rich folks that collect all their income at the capital gains / tax free level.

 

[EnderJE]

I think that everyone generally agrees that there is a fair price to pay in order to live in a functioning society. The debate is on the amount of the fair price. Those that have to pay a high amount generally feel that they are being shafted because of their success. The others who don't pay anything generally feel that they have nothing left to give and need a help up. There are bad examples on both sides (ie people who might manage the system to allow them to get free money - see tax cheats on the high and low end), so I think that the extreme examples are not really helpful. I think that we also agree that we need it / not everyone should be privatized because without that supervisory body, we would have other problems (ie see infrastructure degradation, see tainted meats / water, etc).

Thus, the question is what is the fair amount? Is a progressive system fair or is a flat tax fair?

 

[Mr. dB]

At this point I'm convinced you've never participated in the top bracket.

Of course I fucking haven't, I don't make $373,651 or more.

You do?

Is that a prerequisite for having a valid opinion on the progressive tax rates in our country?

Maybe we should also limit the vote to white men who own land?

 

[Mr. dB]

That's what happens when you declare war on the companies and individuals that create jobs. And until we have president who understands that, more and more people will "qualify".

Right, lets give them a free ride, with no regulation, so we can go back to the Nineteenth Century where the GOP wishes we still were. We can have sweat shops and child labor and pollution and hazardous work conditions with unprotected power tools, it'll be like Capitalist Heaven. A nation of happy industrious proles.

But who's gonna buy the stuff once the middle class has been eliminated?