Ironically the Democrats keep screaming they just want everyone to pay their fair share of taxes.
Define irony: 48 percent of Americans, who pay absolutely no income tax, complaining that the other 52 percent don't pay enough taxes. So is that what they consider fair?
Gary Larson, Mesa
Cerulean posted at 4:29 pm on Tue, Aug 16, 2011.
The Bush tax cuts are why 48% do not pay a tax. Re-instate the Bush tax cuts and that number will drop dramatically.
Dale Whiting posted at 7:04 pm on Tue, Aug 16, 2011.
Good point Cerulean. Gary appears to not understand that the 48% not paying any federal income taxes are still paying 7-1/2 % FICA, Medicare, etc. as well as sales taxes and hense are paying more of a tax burden on their income than are the rest of us pay. Warren Buffett pays less of a percentage of his income on federal income taxes than does any of his staff.
Let's scuttle the Bush 43 Era tax cuts, reform the income tax code, cut way back on tax loop holes, and even consider lowering our top marginal income tax rate on personnal income. And we may need to drop Corporate Income tax rates. Where our top marginal rate is 35% and other places like Switzerland's is about 16%, we are loosing all tax revenues from those patriotic oil companies like Weatherford who have moved to the Alps! Weatherford is a Texas oil company. Thank you Rick Perry!
Rich posted at 10:39 am on Wed, Aug 17, 2011.
"So is that what they consider fair?"
New simplified tax form:
Part A- How much money did you make?
Part B- Send the amount in Part A in enclosed envelope.
Arizona Willie posted at 10:41 am on Wed, Aug 17, 2011.
I don't believe the stat that 48% of Americans pay NOTHING.
There are a few very low income people who actually get a subsidy, but I doubt very much the claim that 48% pay nothing can be proved. Quotes from right wing radio / media don't count as proof.
The biggest tax increase in history came when Reagan removed the deduction for interest on credit cards and cars. And that tax increase fell almost entirely on the middle class.
Many of you younger readers don't even remember the time when you used to be able to deduct the interest you paid on your credit cards and on car loans. No it isn't an old mans fantasy -- once upon a time ( before Reagan ) you could.
Want to stimulate the economy? Bring back that tax deduction and after people filed their taxes and got a HUGE rebate ( compared to what they get now == if any ) you would see retail sales take off really well.
Republicans only count a tax increase when it makes the wealthy pay --- when they increase taxes on the middle class they don't think that counts because only rich people count.
NothingButTheTruth posted at 10:46 am on Wed, Aug 17, 2011.
I agree with you both somewhat, Hey I know, how bout we institute a pay as you go tax? That way even the poor can have way to support their country. Cut corporate taxes to nothing would be a better idea since they just pass the tax along to the consumer anyway. Corporate tax is like inflating money by printing more money in that they are really just a way to tax the masses without the masses knowing they're being fleeced. Allow congress to reform the tax code is like asking foxes to count your chickens cause we all know the foxes just work for the wolves anyway. Dale, if we scuttle the bush tax cuts will the 48% not paying any federal taxes still be paying 7.5% FICA, Medicare, etc as well as sales taxes? That will lower the tax burden on their income tax rate than the rest of us pay?
Accuracy posted at 11:48 am on Wed, Aug 17, 2011.
“So is that what they consider fair?”
According to the IRS, the vast majority of tax return filers — more than 97 percent — reported incomes of less than $200,000. For those tax return filers was; an average income of $54,283 in 2009.
But the IRS does not mention that for a high percentage of the tax return filers was; bigger tax refunds than what was paid in. This just seems strange and not fair. Congress should raise the red flag and look into less tax refunds as a means of less spending each year.
Rodini posted at 2:32 pm on Wed, Aug 17, 2011.
Gary, there is a Patriot in America who could call up any CEO or even the President and they would gladly take his call and listen to any advice he offered. They would be considered fools if they didn't listen to him since he is one of the richest men in the world.
He also happens to be one of the most humble and generous, planning to leave the bulk of his riches to organizations that deal with world hunger, homelessness and joblessness.
His name is Warren Buffett and if you'll get off your crazy rocking horse for a minute and read his latest editorial in the N Y Times this week, you'll see that this man, whose opinion is valued by those with more wealth than they'll ever spend has proclaimed our Congress is useless and it's it's way past time we stop "coddling the wealthy" in America.
He not only says it's high time we get rid of the Bush tax cuts, he also lays another "never-ending" Conservative talking point to shame, when he mentions that after working with "investors for 60 years", he has never yet met an investor who would turn down a sensible investment because of the tax rate on any potential gain!
In other words...Warren Buffet has "Called Your Bluff" Republicans. He's telling you that you have no ground to stand on and, as one of the richest men in the world, it might be wise if you all "Listen Up" for a change, OK?
Stop trying to sell us your nonsense please! We ain't buying those lies any longer! Thank-You
Rodini posted at 2:34 pm on Wed, Aug 17, 2011.
Comprende Amigo's and Amiga's?
Arizona Willie posted at 3:59 pm on Wed, Aug 17, 2011.
NothingButTheTruth --- the statement that corporations just pass the tax along is a rightwing myth.
Yes, some taxes do get passed along. But the tax on their income does not. Taxes they pay on their real estate and goods and services used to produce their product do get passed along.
Have you ever seen a company raise prices and say that they raised the price to cover what they paid in taxes last year?
I don't think so.
General Motors doesn't go to someone who bought one of their cars the previous year and say " well we paid $352 dollars in income tax on the profit on that car so you owe use $352 more ".
If corporations just passed their income tax along to their customers they wouldn't care how much the tax was.
But they DO care VERY VERY MUCH.
Do you really think they would have teams of tax accountants and lawyers on staff if the amount of tax they paid didn't matter to them because they just passed it along?
Companies constantly threaten to move if the city / state doesn't give them a tax break.
Cities offer tax breaks to attract companies.
Why if the tax doesn't matter to the company because they just pass it along?
Use some logic and quit believing the crude passed out by business and their right wing lackeys.
They don't have YOUR best interest at heart.
onerebel posted at 6:03 pm on Wed, Aug 17, 2011.
Gary makes a great point, those paying no taxes are yelling the loudest for the rest of us that pay taxes like me, to pay more. He made no statement about the rich paying too much taxes. Where did you learn your math at Dale ? I to pay FICA, Medicare, etc, plus income tax.
How is it that I pay less in taxes then someone that pays no income tax ? It don't add up. Rodini, it's true the wealthy should not be coddled, but why are Liberals intent on coddling the freeloaders ? And don't tell me they all want to work or can't because most don't. As I keep saying we need a flat tax so ALL put something into the pot and get rid of the nanny state mentality.
Rich posted at 6:05 pm on Wed, Aug 17, 2011.
AW, you understand about bupkis. If a corporation shows a profit, in the end, any taxes are contained in either cost of sales or overhead. Whenever they show up that's where they are. Just because the 2010 buyer of an Impala paid for the 2009 buyers of Impalas, and will be paid for by the 2011 buyers of Impalas doesn't mean the tax wasn't and isn't being passed on.
And of course they care, it goes into the price and effects their sales.
The reason they want tax breaks is to control and own politicians, and we seem to elect ones who are corrupt enough to entertain them.
And of course they don't have MY best interests at heart. They have theirs, too much satisfying ME, they go BK. Not enough satisfying ME, and they go BK. That's business.
If you're going to show the whole world you're a moron, the Constitution gives you that right. But please, don't call it logic.
Cerulean posted at 10:20 pm on Wed, Aug 17, 2011.
I disagree that tax has much effect on price but of course, it depends.
Price depends on competition and what the market will bear. If people have no money and sales are slow, the dealer of the Impala is going to lower his price to compete. The dealer, in this case, takes a ‘perceived’ lose which he manages on his/her books. If there is little competition and someone will pay lots of money for the Impala then, the dealer will increase his price and manages the gains on his/her books.
Goods and services are only worth what someone will pay.
Rich posted at 1:33 am on Thu, Aug 18, 2011.
"Goods and services are only worth what someone will pay. " Only if the money to purchase them is a constant. If the medium of exchange is elastic, so is the price and what someone pays is not always what he wants or even agrees to pay, to prove this to yourself, take any consistent necessity and graph it against a dollar or a penny, something like a loaf of bread. What someone will pay is actually an unknown quantity to him.
wdgnas posted at 5:18 am on Thu, Aug 18, 2011.
considering all the wages of the financial operations are tax deductible. how much money is spent by corporations so they do not pay any taxes? i am guessing they spend more than they would actually pay.
NothingButTheTruth posted at 1:23 pm on Thu, Aug 18, 2011.
Arizona Willie, do you know what the bottom line is? Income minus costs. How are high income taxes paid by a corporation not considered costs? The more I pay in income tax, the less money I have. I don't consider my income as what I made until after taxes are paid. I make 200,000 dollars and pay 50,000 dollars in taxes so my bottom line was 150,000 dollars. As a corporation who pays dividends I don't pay dividends based on 200,000 dollars. I pay dividends based on 150,000 dollars. How is that different from corporations?
Cerulean posted at 8:41 pm on Thu, Aug 18, 2011.
“Only if the money to purchase them is a constant.”
Lets use McDonalds as an example. The burger joint has a variety of junk food options that they offer to a targeted consumer. They know who their purchasers are and how much they will spend on fast food. I have heard it said that most junk food establishments make 80% of their profit on soda. They have discovered that they can mark-up soda 200% but no more. McDonalds studies carefully what its market will bear and they adjust either their price, proportion of product OR profit margin accordingly.
If we tax the corporation of McDonalds, they will balk because they serve a predictable market. They may tell you that they will shut stores, and jobs will be lost but that really only hurts McDonalds profits.
IF the tax goes into the price of the product and you purchase the product then you can afford the tax. The same holds true for the CEO of McDonalds who is willing to pay a lot of money for the Impala. The difference is that more revenue is going to the Fed. The Fed uses it to pay for services that the people have agreed (or disagree) that they want. State and Federal careers usually pay middle class wages.
So, which would you prefer, one $60,000 annual career that pays a tax or 60 $10,000 a year jobs that don’t? It depends, right? McDonalds wants the 60 $10,000. At this juncture, I would prefer to do whatever I can to encourage the 1 $60,000 annual career that pays a tax.