The U.S. Already Soaks the Rich In 2021 the richest 1% paid 45.8% of income taxes, up from..

I believe that the following tax year 2021’s percentages represent tax fairness;

Top 1%, share of federal income tax, 45.8%, average tax rate, 25.9%.

Now my question to YOU is; Do YOU believe that said percentages represent tax fairness?

And if you do understand my question, a YES or NO will suffice.

And once again, my answer to the question I’m asking you is a simple YES.

 

Even if that group pockets 56%, 76%, or 96% of the benefits government spending creates....?

Why would it be fair for the rest of the population to be forced to subsidize that group through the income tax system?

 

While I am not the person you directed these questions to, I will answer them nonetheless.

Being that they represent 26.3% of income while paying 45.8% of taxes...Why in your mind is this particular number fair?

NO

 

Pocket 56,76, or 96% of the benefits how?

Subsidize them how?

 

Because you prefer a system that is less just. Right. While I would also get rid of the income tax (and replace it with taxes on privilege, Pigovian taxes, and a debt-free monetary system), a steeply progressive income tax that burdens mostly very high incomes at least has the advantage of recovering some of the publicly funded subsidy that recipients of such incomes typically receive.

When Japan implemented its NST in 1989, the economy instantly collapsed, and has collapsed again every time the rate has been increased. That is what you want. You want the economy to collapse, so that honest working people will be forced into poverty and forced to subsidize rich, greedy, privileged parasites. I suspect you want honest working people to be forced to subsidize rich, greedy, privileged parasites because you are one of the latter.

 

By owning the privileges, especially land titles (but also IP monopolies, bank licenses, etc.), that get their value from government and the community, not their owners. The Henry George Theorem shows that all government spending on desirable public services and infrastructure is a subsidy to landowners. No one else benefits. THAT'S WHY LAND COSTS SO MUCH.

By being forced to pay unjust taxes that are spent on programs that enrich the privileged, especially landowners. Even public spending on things that are not desirable public services and infrastructure, like bombing foreign countries, goes not to honest working people but to the people who own the companies that make the bombs.

 

Hmm. Without getting into whether land titles should be taxed higher ( it seems to me like this would be state not federal), suffice it to say, if you want to tax land titles, by all means tax land titles. This would collect the money for what it is intended.

Why would you tax this under generic income taxes? You dont honestly know everyone's situation. Maybe they have lots of land, maybe they do not. Taxing the actual target makes, to me, far more sense than a general tax. Do you agree?

I find your logic difficult to grasp.

You are blaming the 1% of people that pay 46% of the taxes, and then concluding that they are the freeloaders. I see that as being illogical.

 

Yes; under the US Constitution, a tax on land titles would have to be apportioned among the states by population. That's not necessarily an insuperable barrier, but a barrier nonetheless.

Yes; I wouldn't tax incomes at all. But if you are going to have an income tax, it is fairer and more efficient to make it steeply progressive, so that it mostly burdens the privilege-based economic rent incomes of the rich.

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his livelihood depends on him not understanding it." -- Upton Sinclair

No. I'm not blaming them, I'm blaming the system, and the crooks who created it. And they do not pay 46% of "the taxes." They only pay 46% of the FEDERAL INCOME tax. How many times do I have to correct that false claim?

They are the freeloaders because they typically get much more in benefits from public spending than they pay in taxes, while honest working people are in the opposite situation. See "Ricardo's Law: House Prices and the Great Tax Clawback Scam," by Fred Harrison. It's about the UK, but the economic principles are the same.

 

I should have said, "direct fiat" not "debt-free." The point of a direct fiat monetary system is to have an independent Mint control the money supply directly, instead of relying on the central bank to control private commercial banks' money issuance through the prime rate. I.e., a direct fiat system still allows private commercial banks to issue debt money, but not to increase the money supply.

 

Hey, no problemo answering a question that I asked to bluesguy.

First, your simple NO answer means that you’ve understood my question, thus, you certainly don’t have a comprehension disorder.

Now, you asked me WHY I believe our top 1% paid their fair share of income tax in tax year 2021

Stay tuned.

 

your concept of justice I reject as parasitic. I don't owe your existence any funding.

 

that's not true, I posted statistics showing the bottom tax payers gain 10+ dollars in government benefits for every tax dollar they pay while the top one percent get far less than a dollar for every dollar they pay in taxes

 

Meh.

You are so far out in left field, it is not worth discussing.

Carry on. I am going to go look for someone arguing within the bounds of reality rather than fantasy.

 

Yes

Bottom 50% 10.4% of income 2.3% of taxes 3.4% rate
Between bottom half and top 25% 17.5% of income 8.4% of taxes 7.2% rate
Top 25% to 10% 19.5% of income 13.4% of taxes 10.3% rate
Top 10% to 5% 10.6% of income 10.2% of taxes 14.3% rate
Top 5% to 1% 15.7% of income 19.9% of taxes 18.9% rate
And top 1% 26.3% of income 45.8% of taxes 25.9% rate




Why is paying 46% of the tax burden on 26% of the income "fair" while the bottom 75% earn 20% of the income by only pay 12% of taxes (and that does not include money they make off the tax system, the effective tax rate at the bottom is actual a negative number because they make money off the tax system). In fact the bottom 50% pay virtually nothing.

Do you reject the Biden and the Dems claims, upon which this campaign will be run, that top 1% aren't paying this fair share and should have their taxes raised?

And if you do understand my question, a YES or NO will suffice.

And once again, my answer to the question I’m asking you is a simple YES.[/QUOTE]

Yes I understand your question, do you understand my position from the get go, I reject the entire "tax fairness" that the top rate is not paying mantra and do not believe tax rates should be set according to such claims. Rates should be set to bring in the most revenues at the least impact on the economy. The Bush43/Rep tax rates seemed closer to that than anything Biden and the Dems want to do because all they care about is convincing people they are going to stick it to those "evil" rich people.

So again the bottom line is do you or will you support the candidate and party that declares it is NOT "fair" and pledge to make it even more progressive?

 

And you think the States (along with the counties and municipalities) will pass such an admendment and let the federal government get in on taxing real property which is one of their major tax revenue sourdes.

Do you believe it is currently not steep enough, if not edit the numbers to what would be in the federal tax system which is the subject of this thread and teh current campaign.

Bottom 50% 10.4% of income 2.3% of taxes 3.4% rate
Between bottom half and top 25% 17.5% of income 8.4% of taxes 7.2% rate
Top 25% to 10% 19.5% of income 13.4% of taxes 10.3% rate
Top 10% to 5% 10.6% of income 10.2% of taxes 14.3% rate
Top 5% to 1% 15.7% of income 19.9% of taxes 18.9% rate
And top 1% 26.3% of income 45.8% of taxes 25.9% rate

How much more progressive than that?

Well whatever happens in your state is your state's affair, the thread is about FEDERAL taxation and the claims it is not "fair" and of course by far the largest taxes the citizens pay are income taxes which is what the claim is about. But do explain how these crooks who created this system are doing so good at the 1% paying 46% of the tax burden, THAT is the system they created to rip everyone else off???

Like what benefits and I could care less about the UK, this is about HERE. The bottom 25% actually MAKE money off the tax system HERE when you add in all their refundable credits including the EITC when even reimburses their FICA contributions so they get a free ride on Social Security and Medicare.

 

.........

 

Which landowner? The ones on each end of a bridge? They alone benefit from the bridge and no one else? What a strange theory.

But the tax subject here is not your local and state taxes, there's 50 versions of that. The OP and comments made are about the FEDERAL tax system and is IT unfair as is being claimed by Biden and the Dems/Left/MSM.

 

If you want equal income, if you want more income left after the taxes you as a citizen should be paying go and earn it the government is not responsible for you getting it.


So what we have now is "fair", did I get you correct on that?

 

Yes COVID skewed everything and will forever bear a big "*". You don't believe that COVID threw all the rules out the window and was certainly not a Trump planned economic policy do you?

Come back to reality. And BTW I am NOT a big fan of the Rep Congresses during Trump's term they did not support his proposed cuts in spending as they should have but they most assurdedly were better than the Dem one that took over.

 

Do you admit #454 was not addressed to me? Why are you demanding I should have addressed a post that was not addressed to me or anyone else for that matter and to have done so within 4 post befores you posted yours?

Stop the trolling and get on the topic.

 

It was and is addressed to you, is this desperate deflection now what you're failing and flailing to hide behind? Tip, you have no clothes, sorry. So, link myself and @dairyair to where you addressed it before post #459. Waiting.....for your weak strawman troll.

 

18% - 20%
There is a prebate to cover the cost of the tax on basic necessities. Just as the current standard deduction accounts for any federal income tax that would be due on basic necessities.

No country has attempted one like the one proposed here which replaces ALL federal taxes and FICA contributions and sends every person the prebate.

 

http://politicalforum.com/index.php...-taxes-up-from.617774/page-19#post-1074744460

And if you keep falsely claiming it was and that I owed some response for some unknown reason between it and your #459 it will be handled accordling.

Your post #459

Again.....What about it? Since when is the governments responsibilty and the purpose of the tax code to limit what a person can earn?

If you care to continue then I await your response to my previous post instead of the snarky remark you did post.

 

Still waiting for you to flail your way to pointing to your response to post #454 post before post #459. You claimed you did and are now "claiming 454 wasn't addressed to you. Victim cards are not well used by trolls nor disingenious discourse.

 

These numbers are inaccurate.