Profit Over People

US-Retard · #1 (**permalink**) 06-26-2006, 07:14 PM

The "compromise": minimum wage raise out; tax-cut for the ultra-rich in.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DemocracyNow.org on June 23, 2006

House Rolls Back Estate Tax
In other Congressional news, the House voted Thursday to roll back parts of the estate tax. Republicans call the bill a “compromise” because it does not completely eliminate the estate tax on those who inherit property. The House bill exempts taxes on individuals with estates valued up to $5 million dollars and on couples with estates valued up to $10 million dollars. Heirs of estates valued at up to $25 million dollars would also see a drop in their tax rates. The bill will now go to the Senate. Congressional tax experts estimate that only 5100 estates would now face taxation, down from the current number of 30,000. The bill is estimated to cost up to $300 billion dollars. The House vote came just one day after the Senate rejected a measure that would have raised the minimum wage for the first time in nearly a decade.

Shifting $300 billion from the top 1% ultra elite to the bottom 99% is not the compromise I had in mind.

Quote:

“Why has the response to rising inequality been a drive to reduce taxes on the rich?”
–Robert Kane Pappas in his documentary “Orwell Rolls In His Grave” (2003)

Quote:

Chinese saying: "Inequality, rather than want, is the cause of trouble."

BTW, under current laws the estate tax only affects 1 in 200 people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

Today, the estates of only 1 out of every 200 people who die owe any estate tax whatsoever, because the first $2.0 million of the value of any estate ($4.0 million for a couple) is totally exempt from the tax. (http://www.cbpp.org/5-31-06tax2.htm)

Please filter your posts through the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities' list of Myths and Realities.

Schwarzwald · #2 (**permalink**) 07-03-2006, 03:36 PM

Thats capitalism.

rota · #3 (**permalink**) 07-03-2006, 09:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schwarzwald";p=&quot

Thats capitalism.

No that's organized crime

oLd-SouL · #4 (**permalink**) 07-03-2006, 11:34 PM

Here's some statistics on taxes paid to the Federal Gov't:

Corporate taxes comprises about 11% of Fed Income
Individual taxes comprises about 60% of Fed Income
The rest is employment (next largest), estate, gift, and excise taxes.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/04db07co.xls

The tax breakdown by income bracket goes like this for 2003 data (data taken from other sites):

The top 1% of individual wage earners paid 34% of the Federal individual Income Tax.

The top 5% of individual wage earners paid 54% of the Federal individual Income Tax.

The top 25% of individual wage earners paid 84% of the Federal individual Income Tax.

The top 50% of individual wage earners paid 96.5% of the Federal individual Income Tax.

This means the bottom 50% of wage earners only pay 3.5% of the total individual income tax but receive an equal and/or greater share than those in the upper 50%.

So why not a tax cut for the ultra-rich. They are the ones paying the lionshare of the taxes anyways for fewer benefits.

JP5 · #5 (**permalink**) 07-04-2006, 07:02 AM

Exactly Old-Soul. I guess some on here would just assume the rest of us turn over all our money to them. Forget that we worked for it and they didn't. Highway robbery!

Mack · #6 (**permalink**) 07-04-2006, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oLd-SouL";p=&quot

Here's some statistics on taxes paid to the Federal Gov't:

Corporate taxes comprises about 11% of Fed Income
Individual taxes comprises about 60% of Fed Income
The rest is employment (next largest), estate, gift, and excise taxes.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/04db07co.xls

The tax breakdown by income bracket goes like this for 2003 data (data taken from other sites):

The top 1% of individual wage earners paid 34% of the Federal individual Income Tax.

The top 5% of individual wage earners paid 54% of the Federal individual Income Tax.

The top 25% of individual wage earners paid 84% of the Federal individual Income Tax.

The top 50% of individual wage earners paid 96.5% of the Federal individual Income Tax.

This means the bottom 50% of wage earners only pay 3.5% of the total individual income tax but receive an equal and/or greater share than those in the upper 50%.

So why not a tax cut for the ultra-rich. They are the ones paying the lionshare of the taxes anyways for fewer benefits.

Federal income tax makes up well under half of all taxes collected by the US government. It is the most progressive tax but is still not nearly as progressive as you claim because I'm assuming your unsited sources are only reporting taxable income. The ultra rich generally have huge sums of money not counted as taxable income due to loop holes like tax free municiple bonds and the like.

When you look at the rest of thre taxes by the US government they are a mix of both slightly progressive and highly regressive taxes. Social security tax and medicare taxes are very regressive. Sales tax is also highly regressive due to disparities in the amount of income saved by the ultra rich and the average joe.

rota · #7 (**permalink**) 07-04-2006, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oLd-SouL";p=&quot

This means the bottom 50% of wage earners only pay 3.5% of the total individual income tax but receive an equal and/or greater share than those in the upper 50%.

So why not a tax cut for the ultra-rich. They are the ones paying the lionshare of the taxes anyways for fewer benefits.

A small price to pay to buy their votes and keep the rich in power getting no-bid billion dollar contracts. The poor vote for a living instead of working. It's their job to vote for their masters.

US-Retard · #8 (**permalink**) 07-04-2006, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by oLd-SouL";p=&quot

Corporate taxes comprises about 11% of Fed Income

They used to comprise over 25% during the Golden Age of the US.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Corporate Income Taxes in the Bush Years

Corporate taxes paid for more than a quarter of 2.0% federal outlays in the 1950s and a fifth in the 1.5% 1960s. They began to decline during the Nixon 1.0% administration, yet even by the second half of 0.5% the 1990s, corporate taxes still covered 11 0.0% 1960 1963 1966 1969 1972 1975 1978 1981 1984 1987 1990 1993 1996 1999 2002 percent of the cost of federal programs. But in fiscal 2002 and 2003, corporate taxes paid for a mere 6 percent of our government’s expenses.

Quote:

Originally Posted by oLd-SouL";p=&quot

So why not a tax cut for the ultra-rich. They are the ones paying the lionshare of the taxes anyways for fewer benefits.

The rich own the lion's share of the wealth and therefore consume the lion's share of the protection and benefits afforded by government.

The top 10% own 71% of all private wealth.
The top 1% now own more than the bottom 90%
Among the industrialized nations, the U.S. has the highest concentration of individual wealth -- roughly 3 times that of the No. 2 nation, Germany. (UN Human Development Report, 199

Here's an idea:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Facts About Taxes

If all taxpayers paid the same 10.5 percent of their wealth in taxes as median income families pay, the taxes of the lowest 40 percent would be cut by 94 percent while the taxes of the wealthiest would triple.

Source: Congressional Budget Office and United for a Fair Economy

The rich don't need more tax cuts. They already own far, far more than the masses combined.

Wildbore · #9 (**permalink**) 07-04-2006, 05:17 PM

Don't the rich already pay income taxes at under half the rate of everyone else?

The rich are paying hardly any taxes relative to their income. The tax burden is on the average person, it seems wrong for the government to focus on making the rich more comfortable.

Its even more wrong when the US is spending like mad and can't pay for any of it.

JP5 · #10 (**permalink**) 07-04-2006, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildbore";p=&quot

Don't the rich already pay income taxes at under half the rate of everyone else?

Nope. The rich have the highest marginal tax rate of 33%. As was stated above, the bottom 50% pay a very small portion....several millions at the very bottom of the pay scale don't pay any. In fact, they get what is called an Earned Income Credit....meaning they pay nothing in, but still get a check from Uncle Sam (which comes from the rich).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildbore";p=&quot

The rich are paying hardly any taxes relative to their income. The tax burden is on the average person, it seems wrong for the government to focus on making the rich more comfortable.

They don't. They focus on job creation and having the economy do well. That creates jobs....which results in benefits and take-home pay for lots of people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wildbore";p=&quot

Its even more wrong when the US is spending like mad and can't pay for any of it.

And most of that money comes from the "rich." But I agree......stop taxing them so much and stop having so many gov't programs that are wasteful and inefficient.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode