Total Posts:129|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Aren't the "1%" Overtaxed?

BigDave80
Posts: 105
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 9:28:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I often hear the claim that the "1%" aren't paying their fairshare. But, I did some research and found that the average total federal tax rate for the top 1% is about 36%:

http://www.theatlantic.com...

This is, by the way, very high by historical standards. Those who make the untrue claim that Obama has lowered taxes need to take note. This doesn't include state and local taxes. I found some research suggesting the top 1% pay an average of around 6% here:

http://www.itepnet.org...

This suggests an average tax rate well in excess of 40%. In high tax states, taxes probably surpass 45% and possibly 50%.

If paying over 40% of your income taxes is not paying your fair share, what is?

That seems like way more than a fair share to me.
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 10:15:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
In my opinion as an outsider and as a Canadian, the biggest problem haunting the US is the plain fact that the top money earners in the US are undertaxed.

It's not a question of the rest of the people trying to steal the rich's money, it's a matter of bring back some sort of equilibrium which would balance out the income inequality. The US is second behind Mexico on the scale of income inequality. Unfortunately the people have been severely brainwashed into believing that they aren't 'entitled' to a fair share.

This of course while the US leads the world in highest income per capita!
BigDave80
Posts: 105
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 10:18:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 10:15:22 PM, monty1 wrote:
In my opinion as an outsider and as a Canadian, the biggest problem haunting the US is the plain fact that the top money earners in the US are undertaxed.

It's not a question of the rest of the people trying to steal the rich's money, it's a matter of bring back some sort of equilibrium which would balance out the income inequality. The US is second behind Mexico on the scale of income inequality. Unfortunately the people have been severely brainwashed into believing that they aren't 'entitled' to a fair share.

This of course while the US leads the world in highest income per capita!

This doesn't answer the question posed in the OP. The top 1% already pay in excess of 40% of their income in taxes. How is that not a fair share?!?!

And, also note that we only have such a high per capita income because we kept taxes low enough (up until recently) to encourage economic growth.
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 10:32:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
It would be in your interest to actually find out just what per centage the wealthy do pay in taxes. You'll find that it's much lower than your 40% estimate. Then when you begin to express it in a more honest way it will be worth my time to discuss the matter further with you.

However, if it turned out to be 50% it would still be too little. Statistics on income inequality don't lie.

At 3/2/2014 10:18:43 PM, BigDave80 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 10:15:22 PM, monty1 wrote:
In my opinion as an outsider and as a Canadian, the biggest problem haunting the US is the plain fact that the top money earners in the US are undertaxed.

It's not a question of the rest of the people trying to steal the rich's money, it's a matter of bring back some sort of equilibrium which would balance out the income inequality. The US is second behind Mexico on the scale of income inequality. Unfortunately the people have been severely brainwashed into believing that they aren't 'entitled' to a fair share.

This of course while the US leads the world in highest income per capita!



This doesn't answer the question posed in the OP. The top 1% already pay in excess of 40% of their income in taxes. How is that not a fair share?!?!

And, also note that we only have such a high per capita income because we kept taxes low enough (up until recently) to encourage economic growth.
BigDave80
Posts: 105
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 10:33:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 10:32:22 PM, monty1 wrote:
It would be in your interest to actually find out just what per centage the wealthy do pay in taxes. You'll find that it's much lower than your 40% estimate. Then when you begin to express it in a more honest way it will be worth my time to discuss the matter further with you.

However, if it turned out to be 50% it would still be too little. Statistics on income inequality don't lie.


It's not my estimate. It is what the data show they actually pay.

And, what kind of insane person things 50% is too low!?
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 10:42:23 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
And so you're suggesting that I may be insane!

Try to work out what are true statistics on taxation as opposed to what you are told and what you so willingly swallow. Begin by understanding that most of the wealthy and all of the very wealthy pay much less than the imaginary 35% proscribed which they whine about.

Or just don't and go buy your weekly ration of made in America beans and rice. We Canadians will eat the cake thank you. It's the price we pay for having our grandparents suffer the 'death panels'. LOL

At 3/2/2014 10:33:48 PM, BigDave80 wrote:
At 3/2/2014 10:32:22 PM, monty1 wrote:
It would be in your interest to actually find out just what per centage the wealthy do pay in taxes. You'll find that it's much lower than your 40% estimate. Then when you begin to express it in a more honest way it will be worth my time to discuss the matter further with you.

However, if it turned out to be 50% it would still be too little. Statistics on income inequality don't lie.



It's not my estimate. It is what the data show they actually pay.

And, what kind of insane person things 50% is too low!?
BigDave80
Posts: 105
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/2/2014 10:58:48 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 10:42:23 PM, monty1 wrote:
And so you're suggesting that I may be insane!

Try to work out what are true statistics on taxation as opposed to what you are told and what you so willingly swallow. Begin by understanding that most of the wealthy and all of the very wealthy pay much less than the imaginary 35% proscribed which they whine about.

Or just don't and go buy your weekly ration of made in America beans and rice. We Canadians will eat the cake thank you. It's the price we pay for having our grandparents suffer the 'death panels'. LOL


I posted stats from very reputable sources in the OP. Check it out.

You have literally provided no evidence for your claims here. I provided mine in the op.
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 11:40:19 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 9:28:27 PM, BigDave80 wrote:
I often hear the claim that the "1%" aren't paying their fairshare. But, I did some research and found that the average total federal tax rate for the top 1% is about 36%:

http://www.theatlantic.com...

This is, by the way, very high by historical standards.

This is extremely inaccurate. The top tax bracket is actually quite low by historical standards...for decades it was well above 90%:

http://www.google.com...

Those who make the untrue claim that Obama has lowered taxes need to take note. This doesn't include state and local taxes. I found some research suggesting the top 1% pay an average of around 6% here:

http://www.itepnet.org...

This suggests an average tax rate well in excess of 40%. In high tax states, taxes probably surpass 45% and possibly 50%.

If paying over 40% of your income taxes is not paying your fair share, what is?

That seems like way more than a fair share to me.
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 12:09:45 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
If you pay taxes, you are taxed over the moral limit, which is zero initiation of force.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
BigDave80
Posts: 105
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 12:13:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 11:40:19 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:28:27 PM, BigDave80 wrote:
I often hear the claim that the "1%" aren't paying their fairshare. But, I did some research and found that the average total federal tax rate for the top 1% is about 36%:

http://www.theatlantic.com...

This is, by the way, very high by historical standards.

This is extremely inaccurate. The top tax bracket is actually quite low by historical standards...for decades it was well above 90%:


Except they didn't actually pay those rates...
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 12:14:11 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 12:09:45 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
If you pay taxes, you are taxed over the moral limit, which is zero initiation of force.

lol, morals. Aren't you the Heartless Bastard Ragnar_Rahl?
Fox-McCloud
Posts: 158
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 12:35:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 12:09:45 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
If you pay taxes, you are taxed over the moral limit, which is zero initiation of force.

Sure, well substantiated claim.
Abortion Is Generally Morally Reprehensible: http://www.debate.org...

The instant we feel anger we have already ceased striving for the truth, and have begun striving for ourselves - Archibald Alison

Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive, but to be young was very heaven! - William Wordsworth
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 1:48:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 9:28:27 PM, BigDave80 wrote:
I often hear the claim that the "1%" aren't paying their fairshare. But, I did some research and found that the average total federal tax rate for the top 1% is about 36%:

http://www.theatlantic.com...

This is, by the way, very high by historical standards. Those who make the untrue claim that Obama has lowered taxes need to take note. This doesn't include state and local taxes. I found some research suggesting the top 1% pay an average of around 6% here:

http://www.itepnet.org...

This suggests an average tax rate well in excess of 40%. In high tax states, taxes probably surpass 45% and possibly 50%.

If paying over 40% of your income taxes is not paying your fair share, what is?

That seems like way more than a fair share to me.

Lame journalism.
While effective tax rates could be that high, in 2009, it appears 20% was the upper limit.
http://www.irs.gov...

You forget that the 1% make a ton of their money on capital gains as well as salaries.
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 3:08:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 2:22:17 PM, TN05 wrote:
Solution: get rid of most tax incentives and create a flat rate tax for everyone.

What, exactly, is an incentive?
Also, do you think you should be taxed on money that is payment for taxes?
My work here is, finally, done.
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 3:16:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 3:08:43 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2014 2:22:17 PM, TN05 wrote:
Solution: get rid of most tax incentives and create a flat rate tax for everyone.

What, exactly, is an incentive?
Also, do you think you should be taxed on money that is payment for taxes?

Stuff like subsidies for businesses, or incetives for purchasing certain products. I think even without these a flat rate tax will be much easier and cheaper for most people to pay.

What exactly do you mean here?
monty1
Posts: 1,084
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 3:20:58 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Sadly a conversation of this sort always seems to degenerate into complete and utter nonsense because the libertarian wackos always show up and destroy any kind of rationality decent people have an interest in pursuing.

Zero taxation? A flat tax where everybody pays the same per centage? Or even the same amount in dollars?

What's the point in trying to discuss something rationally when we have to listen to that sort of greed and claptrap b.s?
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 3:22:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 3:16:40 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 3/3/2014 3:08:43 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2014 2:22:17 PM, TN05 wrote:
Solution: get rid of most tax incentives and create a flat rate tax for everyone.

What, exactly, is an incentive?
Also, do you think you should be taxed on money that is payment for taxes?

Stuff like subsidies for businesses, or incetives for purchasing certain products. I think even without these a flat rate tax will be much easier and cheaper for most people to pay.
I don't think the incentives are that prevalent. The only things I can think of for the individual is green tech (which is over, I believe), mortgage interest deduction (but that is a loan, not the purchase of home), and charity.
Businesses have a few more, but I am not too sure if they are wholly bad. For example, the "Walmart subsidy" is a credit any business can get as long as they employ the poor (those on welfare), elderly, disabled, and a few other classes. I don't see that as a wholly bad thing, TBH.

Care to cite any specifics?


What exactly do you mean here?
Currently, you can not pay federal income taxes on other taxes paid in the year. For example, state income taxes, property taxes, and other taxes based on value, like tabs for your car.
My work here is, finally, done.
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 3:24:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 3:20:58 PM, monty1 wrote:
Sadly a conversation of this sort always seems to degenerate into complete and utter nonsense because the libertarian wackos always show up and destroy any kind of rationality decent people have an interest in pursuing.

Zero taxation? A flat tax where everybody pays the same per centage? Or even the same amount in dollars?

What's the point in trying to discuss something rationally when we have to listen to that sort of greed and claptrap b.s?

So it's greedy to want everyone taxed at the same rate, but it's not greedy to want the rich to pay 80% of their money and have it be given to the poor? You seem like the irrational one.

Under a flat rate tax, if you make twice as much as another person, you'll pay twice as much. If you make half as much as another person, you'll pay half as much as they do. It's fair, balanced, and doesn't punish earning wealth. A progressive tax is clearly inferior to this, as rates increase based on how much money you make and can discourage people from advancing up the ladder.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 3:24:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 3:20:58 PM, monty1 wrote:
Sadly a conversation of this sort always seems to degenerate into complete and utter nonsense because the libertarian wackos always show up and destroy any kind of rationality decent people have an interest in pursuing.

Zero taxation? A flat tax where everybody pays the same per centage? Or even the same amount in dollars?

What's the point in trying to discuss something rationally when we have to listen to that sort of greed and claptrap b.s?

Do you think it is fair that some people pay taxes, some pay none, and others literally receive money from the IRS? The government actually pays some people "taxes". This is called a negative tax liability.

Do you think that is fair that someone can get $7,000 from state and federal governments, simply because they have kids and make $30K?
This is not to be confused with welfare, since this is money directly from the treasury.
My work here is, finally, done.
TN05
Posts: 4,492
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 3:31:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 3:22:10 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2014 3:16:40 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 3/3/2014 3:08:43 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2014 2:22:17 PM, TN05 wrote:
Solution: get rid of most tax incentives and create a flat rate tax for everyone.

What, exactly, is an incentive?
Also, do you think you should be taxed on money that is payment for taxes?

Stuff like subsidies for businesses, or incetives for purchasing certain products. I think even without these a flat rate tax will be much easier and cheaper for most people to pay.
I don't think the incentives are that prevalent. The only things I can think of for the individual is green tech (which is over, I believe), mortgage interest deduction (but that is a loan, not the purchase of home), and charity.

Charity would probably remain, and I'd be hesitant to cut the MID immediately. Green tech incentives would obviously vanish.

Businesses have a few more, but I am not too sure if they are wholly bad. For example, the "Walmart subsidy" is a credit any business can get as long as they employ the poor (those on welfare), elderly, disabled, and a few other classes. I don't see that as a wholly bad thing, TBH.

Care to cite any specifics?

I don't think it is fair to reward businesses for hiring government-favored classes.

One specific I can name are subsidies for power companies. Tens of billions of dollars have been invested in these subsidies over the last decade and it needs to stop. It's not the role of government to become venture capitalists.

What exactly do you mean here?
Currently, you can not pay federal income taxes on other taxes paid in the year. For example, state income taxes, property taxes, and other taxes based on value, like tabs for your car.

I'm not sure about this. It's a deduction, but I'd be hesitant to cut deductions on people unless the entire tax code (state, federal, and local) is reworked to be more uniform and simple. Ideally, I'd like to see a flat income tax adopted at all levels of government to make paying taxes as easy as possible. This would coincide with removal or fade-out of subsidies and making income tax evasion a harsher crime.
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 3:57:34 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 9:28:27 PM, BigDave80 wrote:
I often hear the claim that the "1%" aren't paying their fairshare. But, I did some research and found that the average total federal tax rate for the top 1% is about 36%:

http://www.theatlantic.com...

This is, by the way, very high by historical standards. Those who make the untrue claim that Obama has lowered taxes need to take note. This doesn't include state and local taxes. I found some research suggesting the top 1% pay an average of around 6% here:

http://www.itepnet.org...

This suggests an average tax rate well in excess of 40%. In high tax states, taxes probably surpass 45% and possibly 50%.

If paying over 40% of your income taxes is not paying your fair share, what is?

That seems like way more than a fair share to me.

The richest pay 39.5% in Federal Income Tax, not 36%.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 3:58:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 3:31:56 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 3/3/2014 3:22:10 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2014 3:16:40 PM, TN05 wrote:
At 3/3/2014 3:08:43 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2014 2:22:17 PM, TN05 wrote:
Solution: get rid of most tax incentives and create a flat rate tax for everyone.

What, exactly, is an incentive?
Also, do you think you should be taxed on money that is payment for taxes?

Stuff like subsidies for businesses, or incetives for purchasing certain products. I think even without these a flat rate tax will be much easier and cheaper for most people to pay.
I don't think the incentives are that prevalent. The only things I can think of for the individual is green tech (which is over, I believe), mortgage interest deduction (but that is a loan, not the purchase of home), and charity.

Charity would probably remain, and I'd be hesitant to cut the MID immediately. Green tech incentives would obviously vanish.

Businesses have a few more, but I am not too sure if they are wholly bad. For example, the "Walmart subsidy" is a credit any business can get as long as they employ the poor (those on welfare), elderly, disabled, and a few other classes. I don't see that as a wholly bad thing, TBH.

Care to cite any specifics?

I don't think it is fair to reward businesses for hiring government-favored classes.
Even if taxpayers are better off?
I think it is up to $4000 for the first year of employment. So, if an elderly or welfare mom is making an extra $8000, doesn't that mean the government isn't paying $8000 in welfare?

One specific I can name are subsidies for power companies. Tens of billions of dollars have been invested in these subsidies over the last decade and it needs to stop. It's not the role of government to become venture capitalists.
Is it the government's role to establish said monopoly?
Is it the government's role to ensure there is power?

I don't know about you, but I don't want my street torn up by five different power companies each month because homeowners are switching companies.
Besides, that is a lot of duplicated material, no?

What exactly do you mean here?
Currently, you can not pay federal income taxes on other taxes paid in the year. For example, state income taxes, property taxes, and other taxes based on value, like tabs for your car.

I'm not sure about this. It's a deduction, but I'd be hesitant to cut deductions on people unless the entire tax code (state, federal, and local) is reworked to be more uniform and simple. Ideally, I'd like to see a flat income tax adopted at all levels of government to make paying taxes as easy as possible. This would coincide with removal or fade-out of subsidies and making income tax evasion a harsher crime.

Careful now, adding deductions makes it not fair, doesn't it?
Twice as much no longer means twice as much, thus is not fair.
My work here is, finally, done.
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 3:58:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/2/2014 10:15:22 PM, monty1 wrote:
In my opinion as an outsider and as a Canadian, the biggest problem haunting the US is the plain fact that the top money earners in the US are undertaxed.

The average citizen pays 15%. The rich pay 39.5%. Hardly "under taxed." Tax shouldn't be used as a weapon against rich people for having more money.

It's not a question of the rest of the people trying to steal the rich's money, it's a matter of bring back some sort of equilibrium which would balance out the income inequality. The US is second behind Mexico on the scale of income inequality. Unfortunately the people have been severely brainwashed into believing that they aren't 'entitled' to a fair share.

This of course while the US leads the world in highest income per capita!
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 4:00:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 11:40:19 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
At 3/2/2014 9:28:27 PM, BigDave80 wrote:
I often hear the claim that the "1%" aren't paying their fairshare. But, I did some research and found that the average total federal tax rate for the top 1% is about 36%:

http://www.theatlantic.com...

This is, by the way, very high by historical standards.

This is extremely inaccurate. The top tax bracket is actually quite low by historical standards...for decades it was well above 90%:

On one note, no one actually paid those. Rockefeller was one of very few rich enough to pay the 90% taxes.

http://www.google.com...

Those who make the untrue claim that Obama has lowered taxes need to take note. This doesn't include state and local taxes. I found some research suggesting the top 1% pay an average of around 6% here:

http://www.itepnet.org...

This suggests an average tax rate well in excess of 40%. In high tax states, taxes probably surpass 45% and possibly 50%.

If paying over 40% of your income taxes is not paying your fair share, what is?

That seems like way more than a fair share to me.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 4:12:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 3:58:51 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/2/2014 10:15:22 PM, monty1 wrote:
In my opinion as an outsider and as a Canadian, the biggest problem haunting the US is the plain fact that the top money earners in the US are undertaxed.

The average citizen pays 15%. The rich pay 39.5%. Hardly "under taxed." Tax shouldn't be used as a weapon against rich people for having more money.

I think you are confusing marginal rates with effective rates.
My work here is, finally, done.
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 4:15:46 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 4:12:03 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2014 3:58:51 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/2/2014 10:15:22 PM, monty1 wrote:
In my opinion as an outsider and as a Canadian, the biggest problem haunting the US is the plain fact that the top money earners in the US are undertaxed.

The average citizen pays 15%. The rich pay 39.5%. Hardly "under taxed." Tax shouldn't be used as a weapon against rich people for having more money.

I think you are confusing marginal rates with effective rates.

The top 1% are so wealthy that they don't even know they're paying 10 or 15% on anything. When you earn that much money, the marginal rates you pay hardly dents the effective rates. (Assuming I interrupted what you said right.)
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 4:21:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 4:15:46 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/3/2014 4:12:03 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2014 3:58:51 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/2/2014 10:15:22 PM, monty1 wrote:
In my opinion as an outsider and as a Canadian, the biggest problem haunting the US is the plain fact that the top money earners in the US are undertaxed.

The average citizen pays 15%. The rich pay 39.5%. Hardly "under taxed." Tax shouldn't be used as a weapon against rich people for having more money.

I think you are confusing marginal rates with effective rates.

The top 1% are so wealthy that they don't even know they're paying 10 or 15% on anything. When you earn that much money, the marginal rates you pay hardly dents the effective rates. (Assuming I interrupted what you said right.)

Partially interpreted it correctly ;)
If you are familiar with limits in math then you understand why you are right. The more they make taxed at 39.6% the closer to the actual tax rate it will be because the lower rates are so relatively small.

However, the people who make tons of money often make it by other means than just working. These other means are often subject to lessor tax rates, namely 0% for municipal bonds, and 15% (maybe more now) for capital gains. If half your income is taxed straight at 23.5% (I think that is the CG tax now), the limit of the tax rate will be closer to 31%.

Of course, there are always the deductions to consider...
I touched on it here with Sadolite, if it helps.
http://www.debate.org...
My work here is, finally, done.
donald.keller
Posts: 3,709
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 4:27:43 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 4:21:22 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2014 4:15:46 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/3/2014 4:12:03 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2014 3:58:51 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/2/2014 10:15:22 PM, monty1 wrote:
In my opinion as an outsider and as a Canadian, the biggest problem haunting the US is the plain fact that the top money earners in the US are undertaxed.

The average citizen pays 15%. The rich pay 39.5%. Hardly "under taxed." Tax shouldn't be used as a weapon against rich people for having more money.

I think you are confusing marginal rates with effective rates.

The top 1% are so wealthy that they don't even know they're paying 10 or 15% on anything. When you earn that much money, the marginal rates you pay hardly dents the effective rates. (Assuming I interrupted what you said right.)

Partially interpreted it correctly ;)
If you are familiar with limits in math then you understand why you are right. The more they make taxed at 39.6% the closer to the actual tax rate it will be because the lower rates are so relatively small.

However, the people who make tons of money often make it by other means than just working. These other means are often subject to lessor tax rates, namely 0% for municipal bonds, and 15% (maybe more now) for capital gains. If half your income is taxed straight at 23.5% (I think that is the CG tax now), the limit of the tax rate will be closer to 31%.

Ah. You are talking about bonds, stock, and so forth. I wasn't including those. Didn't think including those things were important when we're talking about income tax. Of course, those are taxed differently for different reasons.

Of course, there are always the deductions to consider...
I touched on it here with Sadolite, if it helps.
http://www.debate.org...

I always believed in a Flat Tax Rate with Deductions. Never felt the job of the Government was to make sure everyone had an equally hard time paying taxes. But that's another discussion that we could carry on for years.
-- Don't forget to submit your unvoted debates to the Voter's Union --

OFFICIAL DK/TUF 2016 Platform: http://www.debate.org...

My Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com...
#SaveThePresidency
#SaveTheSite

-- DK/TUF 2016 --
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2014 4:32:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/3/2014 4:27:43 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/3/2014 4:21:22 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2014 4:15:46 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/3/2014 4:12:03 PM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/3/2014 3:58:51 PM, donald.keller wrote:
At 3/2/2014 10:15:22 PM, monty1 wrote:
In my opinion as an outsider and as a Canadian, the biggest problem haunting the US is the plain fact that the top money earners in the US are undertaxed.

The average citizen pays 15%. The rich pay 39.5%. Hardly "under taxed." Tax shouldn't be used as a weapon against rich people for having more money.

I think you are confusing marginal rates with effective rates.

The top 1% are so wealthy that they don't even know they're paying 10 or 15% on anything. When you earn that much money, the marginal rates you pay hardly dents the effective rates. (Assuming I interrupted what you said right.)

Partially interpreted it correctly ;)
If you are familiar with limits in math then you understand why you are right. The more they make taxed at 39.6% the closer to the actual tax rate it will be because the lower rates are so relatively small.

However, the people who make tons of money often make it by other means than just working. These other means are often subject to lessor tax rates, namely 0% for municipal bonds, and 15% (maybe more now) for capital gains. If half your income is taxed straight at 23.5% (I think that is the CG tax now), the limit of the tax rate will be closer to 31%.

Ah. You are talking about bonds, stock, and so forth. I wasn't including those. Didn't think including those things were important when we're talking about income tax. Of course, those are taxed differently for different reasons.
Yes, taxed differently, but still are income taxes filed on the income tax return.
So, with the rich, they are important to include. The average citizen, not so much.

Of course, there are always the deductions to consider...
I touched on it here with Sadolite, if it helps.
http://www.debate.org...

I always believed in a Flat Tax Rate with Deductions. Never felt the job of the Government was to make sure everyone had an equally hard time paying taxes. But that's another discussion that we could carry on for years.
My work here is, finally, done.