Liberal Media Goes Completely Silent After New Report Proves Trump’s Tax Cuts Were Massive Success

Nobody intelligent ever questioned that Buffet pays more in total tax dollars than his secretary, as he should. The problem is that he pays less as a percent of his income compared to his secretary. That's not right. The problem with the tax code is that it allows the ultra-rich too many loopholes. That needs to be fixed. However, good luck with that, with the wealthy donors making sure that their loopholes stay open. Only the loopholes for the middle class get closed, like SALT. Of course, with the GOP having convinced their voters that the rich are the job creators and should be taxed less, that doesn't help either.

 

Thanks for answering my question and saying that you would rather pay Buffet's secretary's taxes. That wasn't so hard, was it?

 

Whatever dude, I didn't answer you question because, until you've answered mine yours doesn't deserve an answer.

 

We have all heard the Buffet and his secretary trope many times over.

Obviously, Buffet does not have regular income, rather his is capital gains which is taxed at a far different rate than his secretary's federal income tax rate for very good reasons that benefit and incentivize investing. Additionally, even with his capital gains, he only pays the capital gains rate on the increase in his capital gains that he actually sold in that year rather than the increase in his overall portfolio. For this reason, this comparison is apples to oranges to the point that any comparison in rate paid is truly nonsensical. There is not one iota of logic in making that comparison.

With the upper 10% paying somewhere in the neighborhood of 71% of all taxes, and the upper 1% paying 40% of all taxes, I truly fail to see how this is somehow indicative of the higher income groups not paying enough. In my sincere opinion, the left has deceived you and many others as to what is fair in regards to this topic.

 

I asked the question long, long ago. You deflected because you didn't want to answer it. But, I do understand why you don't want to answer it.

 

I already answered your question in post #52 — the only one avoiding anything here is you.

 

What percentage of wealth does the top 10% hold?
What percent does the top 1% hold?

 

You didn't answer it. You deflected. But, I understand why you couldn't answer the question. You wouldn't look good if you had answered it honestly.

 

We were talking about how much taxes are paid. The top 10% and the top 1% pay the huge majority of federal income taxes collected while half of Americans pay zero. Zero isn't a fair share. Zero is zero.

 

And I asked my question in the first reply to your long, long ago question. Why because your question obfuscates the fact that Warren Buffet would be happy to pay more in taxes to the nation that made him rich. Which was the point and answer to my question; "Why is it then that that analogy was first made by "Warren Buffet"?" The analogy being that Mr. Buffet feels his secretary is being taxed unfairly when compared to himself and his taxes. Which obviates the reason you refused to answer my question, which nullifies your point.

 

You didn't answer the question. I asked apples. You replied oranges because you didn't want to answer the question.

 

LOL. The facts prove that revenues increased after the 2017 tax cuts.

 

No, in my post #111 I did answer your question and gave a thorough analysis of why it's bogus, what the original statement meant and its origin. Now you're being silly, grasping at straws because your point is debunked and mute.

 

We do not tax wealth, so the question is an irrelevant strawman. We only tax income in a given year.

 

Which is totally disingenuous because we went father into debt after Mitch McConnell's tax cuts, than ever, since Reagan.

IF you got a raise for $100 but, increased your credit card debt by a $10,000 would you declare your budget better off. OF COURSE NOT!

 

It's a simple question. It doesn't need a lengthy answer. Whose taxes would you rather pay, Buffet's secretary or Buffet's? It's a one word answer and you can't answer it with one word.

 

That's because we spent more and Democrats signed off on it.

 

How did I not answer it?
You asked who’s taxes I would rather pay

I said:
“I would rather pay his secretary’s amount and his tax rate percentage”

What is difficult to comprehend in my answer?

You haven’t even attempted to answer my question.

 

Then move it to all income by all sources.

You don’t comprehend what a strawman is if you believe that was one.

The issue is our entire tax system

 

It's anything but a simple question when put in the context of Mr. Buffet's original statement. Like most of your questions it's totally disingenuous. And, unanswerable unless you are able to give accurate numbers on their respective taxes. Bet you can't.

 

It’s almost like the top 10% have the vast majority of the resources and the bottom half of the nation exists almost at a poverty level.

 

And so did republicans.

 

-Accumulated wealth from prior years is NOT a source of income in any fashion. Income that created that wealth was taxed in the year that it was earned. You are confused.

-A strawman is arguing against a point that was not raised. Bringing up percentage of wealth in a discussion that is not about accumulated wealth in any way, is in fact a strawman argument. You are arguing against points that are not part of the conversation, hence the "strawman" that you can easily knock down. Even if you show that the upper 1% holds an inordinate percentage of wealth, you have done not one thing to refute what was being discussed which is why it is a strawman argument.

If you do not understand this, it is YOU that does not comprehend the concept of a strawman.

 

You can't answer it like that. What the secretary paid is what the secretary paid. If she paid someone else's rate then she wouldn't have paid the same that she paid. You need to answer the question cleanly. Whose taxes would you rather pay?

 

Again, we are talking about the taxes they pay, not your jealousy. The rich pay pretty much all of the federal income taxes now while about 50% of Americans don't pay their fair share because they pay zero.