Who Pays Income Taxes?

orion · September 26, 2006, 6:50pm

[quote]nephorm wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
The people who make the most should pay the most. Seems clear to me.

And that is how it would work if there were a flat percentage across the board. If taxes were a flat 25%, and I make $100,000, I would pay out $25,000 to the government. If you made $10,000, you would pay $2500. Make more=pay more.

But with the current system, not only do you pay more, you also pay a higher percent of your income. That’s not right. [/quote]

Unless your income is REALLY high and not from employment, than you pay zilch, nada, niente, a schmonzes so to speak…

Progressive income tax is a great way to ensure the middle class does not get uppity though…

Where HH is absolutely right is that taxes are intrinsically unfair and an act of violence, so everyone that can avoids taxation.

The only ones that are left are the ones who need employment to stay alive and pay their bills. They cannot flee and avoid taxation, which is why they are fucked.

Has nothing to do with fairness, only with a lot of sheep getting fleeced regularily…

grew7 · September 26, 2006, 7:01pm

[quote]hspder wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
It means that half of all people are basically getting the benefits of American society as a gift from those who produce.

Again, you seem to have a poor grasp of Math for a Math teacher.

No. It means half of all people barely make enough money to make ends meet – much less pay tax.
[/quote]

But doesn’t that mean HH was correct when he said that most don’t pay tax?

Kayrob · September 26, 2006, 7:01pm

Talk about unfair,
Jock taxes are perfect examples of a large group imposing an unfair and unreasonable tax on a smaller wealthier group.

Marmadogg · September 26, 2006, 7:13pm

[quote]Kayrob wrote:
Talk about unfair,
Jock taxes are perfect examples of a large group imposing an unfair and unreasonable tax on a smaller wealthier group.[/quote]

huh?

Kayrob · September 26, 2006, 7:33pm

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
Kayrob wrote:
Talk about unfair,
Jock taxes are perfect examples of a large group imposing an unfair and unreasonable tax on a smaller wealthier group.

huh?[/quote]

//moneycentral.msn.com/content/Taxes/P112872.asp

Jock taxes often result in double taxation, and are an example of the large paychecks of a small group of taxpayers being targeted.

hspder · September 26, 2006, 7:47pm

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
The poor and many in the middle class GET TO LIVE HERE FOR FREE or damn near close to it. They get police, fire, FBI, food stamps, on and on, FOR FREE. If you made $20,000/year but got roads, schools, and a military to protect you, you’re living like a prince![/quote]

Wow. I sure would like to see the reaction of anyone in that situation that you said that to.

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Plus, you have unheard of opportunity in this country to rise — I worked in a factory at night, 3rd shift, got a degree and became a teacher, eventually getting an MA in Math Ed. All that time, while living in dire poverty, I received all the benefits of living here AS A GIFT from the men who produce.[/quote]

I’m sorry you have yourself in such low regard. Really, I am. How can you live with yourself, believing that you do not “produce”? I’m not trying to be funny here – I honestly wonder how you can live believing that. Apparently I have far more respect and consideration for you than what you have for yourself…

hspder · September 26, 2006, 7:52pm

For some reason this thread reminded me of one of Larry David’s skits:

"
When you have money, the only way you can get any sympathy at all is to say you have cancer. You could lose a limb, no one would care. Only when they know you’re going to die do you get anyone feeling sorry for you. And even then, some people don’t. “Serves him right, rich prick.” That’s what I am now, a “rich prick.” Prick always follows the word rich. If you’re rich, you’re a prick. Just the way schmuck always follows the word poor. So I went from a poor schmuck to a rich prick without hardly any transition. Of course, I was a poor schmuck longer than I’ve been a rich prick, and frankly, I’m not that much happier as a prick than a schmuck. I never thought I’d become a prick. Neither did my friends.

They said, “He’ll never be a prick!” And then, boom, I’m a prick. Now I have all new friends. All pricks. Schmucks call me from time to time. I say, “I can’t talk to you. I’m a prick.”
"

BostonBarrister · September 27, 2006, 12:04pm

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
My federal + state + real estate taxes = 50%+

It that fair?[/quote]

For state and local, blame your beloved state and township in New Jersey.

However, the AMT is all screwed up, I agree with you.

Which is why I am for a flat tax that everyone pays (with the bottom 20% of incomes eligible for refunds on a sliding scale). Not that it will ever happen, but still…

BostonBarrister · September 27, 2006, 12:06pm

BTW, the numbers for 2004 are out:

Rich people pay an even larger percentage of taxes now than they have for decades – Bush tax policies at work?

Lorisco · September 28, 2006, 4:58pm

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
hspder wrote:

Since you are a Math teacher, I assume you understand what that means.

So you seem to have a problem with the fact that some people make more money than others. You’re basically attacking the fact that there is a tremendous income inequality in the US.

So you’re a filthy commie.

Why? Well, you know in what political system everybody pays the same amount of tax, right? And you know why, right? Don’t pretend you don’t. You’re a commie. Just admit it!

It means that half of all people are basically getting the benefits of American society as a gift from those who produce. It means that about 90% of us either get a free ride or a ride for chump change. And the people who make this bonanza possible get spit upon by libs.

The supreme irony is also when I see someone complain that ‘all they got was a lousy $180 tax refund’, never realizing any of the above. Then there’s the demagoguery, where you and your lib buddies scream about heartless Republicans giving a tax break to the rich.

There is justice, Hspder, whether you and your fellow libs want to admit or not. It will someday take a big bite out of your collective asses.

[/quote]

That’s right, Bush giving all those tax cuts to the rich at the expense of the poor! You rich bastard!

What a minute, if tax cuts go to anyone who pays taxes, then the “rich” must mean anyone who works for a living. And since the poor by definition have no money, how can giving some of the money that people actually earned themselves back to them take anything away from someone who never had it in the first place? Hummm…

I will have to go back to the Lib play book to find an answer to this…

Oh, now I know what the problem is, I’m using logic and reason instead of emotion and smoking a lot of weed! My mistake.

Marmadogg · September 28, 2006, 5:41pm

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
My federal + state + real estate taxes = 50%+

It that fair?

For state and local, blame your beloved state and township in New Jersey.

However, the AMT is all screwed up, I agree with you.

Which is why I am for a flat tax that everyone pays (with the bottom 20% of incomes eligible for refunds on a sliding scale). Not that it will ever happen, but still…[/quote]

I would get screwed on real estate taxes and mortgage interest no matter where I lived.

Hack_Wilson · September 28, 2006, 6:37pm

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Why are you making so much sense lately?

Do you believe all americans are entitled to deduct their real estate taxes from their federal taxes?

Why or why not?

I don’t know. I know very little about the details of either. My field is neither economics or real estate and I own no land currently. I’ll research both issues and make a comment when I feel I have enough knowledge to judge them.

I was agreeing with his point that rich people should shut up and pay taxes and simply enjoy being rich…as opposed to bitching about paying more than poor people percentage-wise. [/quote]

he he he. problem is the definition of rich usually means ‘anyone making more than me’, right?

enjoy being rich? come on. how do you do that? i’m not saying i’m rich. the government says i am. i’m pretty busy working, looking for sound investments, protecting my assets and trying to provide for my family to ‘enjoy’ being rich.

poor people sure as fuck enjoy being poor, though, huh? don’t have to work. don’t have to worry about money 'cause that fucking check shows up the first of every month. don’t have to worry 'bout taxes 'cause they ain’t making nuttin to tax! sounds pretty worry fucking free to me.

meanwhile i pay the U.S. government about 45k every year so they can lay on their asses. percentages got nothing to do with it. dollars is what matters. i work for what’s mine. can’t say the same for everyone.

Sloth · September 29, 2006, 2:39am

Consumption tax. Government only funds defense and infrastructure. Ah, that would be heaven.

ALDurr · September 29, 2006, 2:45pm

[quote]Hack Wilson wrote:
poor people sure as fuck enjoy being poor, though, huh? don’t have to work. don’t have to worry about money 'cause that fucking check shows up the first of every month. don’t have to worry 'bout taxes 'cause they ain’t making nuttin to tax! sounds pretty worry fucking free to me.
[/quote]

Oh yeah, it’s a party all right! Not knowing if you can afford food to eat, living in shitty conditions (if you even have a place to live at all), hoping you don’t get sick because you may have to chose between paying for medicine or paying for food. Wow! Sounds worry free to me!

You can’t possibly be this idiotic and myopic in your thinking to truly believe this bullshit. If you are, you are really a sad and screwed up individual and have succeeded in being the most morally bankrupt person on this board (and that’s saying alot considering some of the characters that post on here).

I really hope that you were just being overly sarcastic and didn’t realize how bad this reads.

grew7 · September 29, 2006, 5:08pm

[quote]ALDurr wrote:
Hack Wilson wrote:
poor people sure as fuck enjoy being poor, though, huh? don’t have to work. don’t have to worry about money 'cause that fucking check shows up the first of every month. don’t have to worry 'bout taxes 'cause they ain’t making nuttin to tax! sounds pretty worry fucking free to me.

Oh yeah, it’s a party all right! Not knowing if you can afford food to eat, living in shitty conditions (if you even have a place to live at all), hoping you don’t get sick because you may have to chose between paying for medicine or paying for food. Wow! Sounds worry free to me!

You can’t possibly be this idiotic and myopic in your thinking to truly believe this bullshit. If you are, you are really a sad and screwed up individual and have succeeded in being the most morally bankrupt person on this board (and that’s saying alot considering some of the characters that post on here).

I really hope that you were just being overly sarcastic and didn’t realize how bad this reads.[/quote]

You’re only poor if you’re not producing enough. If you’re not producing enough, we don’t really need you. For people who don’t produce, the poor are lucky they’re alive. They should be grateful for that instead of trying to drag down the people who can produce.

ALDurr · September 29, 2006, 5:47pm

[quote]grew7 wrote:
You’re only poor if you’re not producing enough. If you’re not producing enough, we don’t really need you. For people who don’t produce, the poor are lucky they’re alive. They should be grateful for that instead of trying to drag down the people who can produce.[/quote]

I take it all back. This is the most morally bankrupt person on this board and this is one of the dumbest things written on here.

Hack_Wilson · September 29, 2006, 6:13pm

[quote]ALDurr wrote:
grew7 wrote:
You’re only poor if you’re not producing enough. If you’re not producing enough, we don’t really need you. For people who don’t produce, the poor are lucky they’re alive. They should be grateful for that instead of trying to drag down the people who can produce.

I take it all back. This is the most morally bankrupt person on this board and this is one of the dumbest things written on here.[/quote]

well, al. most of what i wrote was ‘over-the-top’ sarcasm meant to over-emphasize a point of view: That the ‘rich’ are sometimes not so rich and the poor are sometimes not really trying to be any thing other than poor because our government does not do a good enough job of incentivizing hard work, savings, etc.

I’ll say this and you can disagree if you like. I am the director of a human services agency. i’ve been in human services for about 12 years now. i’ve been in IV-D (child support) and TANF (welfare) and medicaid. in all these years i have not encountered very many poor people who are willing to work hard in order to NOT be poor.

a great deal of the people on assistance (of varying kinds) are criminals, drug users, alcholics, etc. these people are not intereted in producing or succeeding. they are interested in the checks they get every month. so don’t tell me how i don’t care and how you pity my attitude. i have done more to help people get off of assistance and get into the real world than you or anyone on this fucking board!

i also do more to make sure that these people get their money, money that many of them will use on drugs and booze. a GREAT many of them. and then they’ll cry poor or claim that they’ve been targeted when their kids get taken away and put in foster care. i see it every day of my life.

liberals like to have an ideal of the ‘noble’ poor. mostly, that is NOT REAL, al. sorry.

ALDurr · September 29, 2006, 8:00pm

[quote]Hack Wilson wrote:
well, al. most of what i wrote was ‘over-the-top’ sarcasm meant to over-emphasize a point of view: That the ‘rich’ are sometimes not so rich and the poor are sometimes not really trying to be any thing other than poor because our government does not do a good enough job of incentivizing hard work, savings, etc.
[/quote]

This is what I thought you were saying and I do agree with you on that. Had you said this instead of the H2 “New York Post” style of posting, I wouldn’t even have said anything to you.

Maybe its because they don’t know how not to be poor. No one has shown them they way to not be poor, so they repeat the cycle. You can’t blame someone for not understanding something that they have never been exposed to and have never seen in action.

Oh please, you righteous indignation is just more of your drama queen bullshit! Until now, no one knew what the fuck you did for a living! All anyone knew on here about you is that you apparently make a good amount of money, you like to brag about yourself, you like to feel superior at others’ expense and you are caustic and confrontational! This is the forum persona that you have presented thus far! No one has said you don’t care and no one has any pity for your attitude! You’ve been showing your ass ever since your first post in this forum! So if someone gets the impression that you are an asshole, it’s your own fault! Get over yourself already!

[quote]
i also do more to make sure that these people get their money, money that many of them will use on drugs and booze. a GREAT many of them. and then they’ll cry poor or claim that they’ve been targeted when their kids get taken away and put in foster care. i see it every day of my life.

liberals like to have an ideal of the ‘noble’ poor. mostly, that is NOT REAL, al. sorry.[/quote]

So I guess you feel real good about yourself helping the poor peasants while looking down your nose at them? You think you are the only one that has been around this environment? 12 years? That’s it? Please, spare me! Some of us actually grew up in this environment and we know more about the ‘noble’ poor than you realize! Some of us actually were the ‘noble’ poor and we managed to work our way out without the help of asshole, jerkoff elitists like you looking down their noses at us! Some of us that worked our way out actually go back and help those that are still there! The difference is that we don’t do it for the paycheck like you do and we don’t look at them as less than human!

If it looks like I’m questioning your motives, well, so far your “shit on them” attitude hasn’t indicated any different! Deal with it!

Lorisco · September 29, 2006, 9:04pm

[quote]ALDurr wrote:
Hack Wilson wrote:
well, al. most of what i wrote was ‘over-the-top’ sarcasm meant to over-emphasize a point of view: That the ‘rich’ are sometimes not so rich and the poor are sometimes not really trying to be any thing other than poor because our government does not do a good enough job of incentivizing hard work, savings, etc.