Media Misinformation Campaign Succeeds: 'Most Americans Say Tax System Favors Wealthy'
For months, President Obama and his faithful media minions have been engaging in a shameless class warfare campaign to convince the American people that regardless of the facts, rich people pay less in taxes than average citizens.
On Tuesday, CNN.com reported the news that this misinformation campaign has succeeded, and almost 70 percent of the nation now believes the tax system favors the wealthy:
As procrastinators rush to file their 2011 tax returns by the Tuesday deadline, a new poll shows more than two-thirds of Americans believe the revenue system benefits the wealthy while being unfair to average workers.
In the CNN/ORC survey, 68% of respondents said the current tax system benefits the rich and is unfair to ordinary workers, compared with 29% who disagreed with that view.
Although it clearly doesn't matter - especially to Obama, Democrats, and the corrupt media that serve them! - nothing can be further from the truth.
As this IRS table clearly shows, people making $200,000 and up most definitely pay a higher federal income tax rate than those making less:
On top of this, numbers provided by the Congressional Budget Office not only demonstrate that the rich pay far more of the total percentage of all federal taxes collected, their contribution has continually increased since 1979:
This first chart totally destroys the liberal orthodoxy that taxes have shifted from the rich to lower income earners since the Reagan revolution began. In fact, nothing can be further from the truth.
"Total federal tax liabilities" include income taxes, corporate taxes, social insurance taxes, and excise taxes. As you can plainly see, the share of these taxes paid by all quintiles EXCEPT the highest one has declined since 1979.
By contrast, the top quintile has seen its share of total payments go from 56.4 percent in 1979 to 69.3 in 2006. The wealthiest one percent have seen their share go from 15.4 percent in 1979 to 28.3 percent in 2006.
But they don't pay their "fair share."
Now let's break this down:
Notice how the two lowest quintiles have seen their share of individual income taxes go negative. This is because the lowest 40 percent of wage earners on average are receiving money from the federal government rather than paying income taxes, a dramatic shift since Reagan was first elected.
Notice, too, how that quintile in the middle has seen its share drop from 10.7 percent in 1979 to 4.4 percent in 2006. Yet the top quintile has gone from 64.9 percent to 86.3 percent, with the wealthiest one percent seeing its share more than double from 18.3 percent to 39.1 percent.
But they don't pay their "fair share."
Now let's look at social insurance taxes (Medicare, Social Security, unemployment):
The lowest quintile still pays roughly the same percentage it did in 1979, while the next three quintiles have shown modest declines.
Not surprisingly, ALL of the gain has come from the top quintile going from 35.9 percent in 1979 to 43.5 percent in 2006. The richest one percent saw their contribution go from 1.3 percent to 4.0 percent.
But they don't pay their "fair share."
Now let's look at corporate income taxes:
Once again, the four bottom quintiles - or 80 percent of Americans! - saw their share decline since 1979. But not the top quintile, which saw its share of corporate income taxes go from 76.5 percent in 1979 to 87.2 percent in 2006. The top one percent saw their share go from 37.8 percent to 57.1 percent.
But they don't pay their "fair share."
As for federal excise taxes:
No really significant changes here.
Add it all up, the Reagan revolution has actually been quite beneficial for almost all Americans when it comes to federal taxes EXCEPT for the upper income earners who have seen their share of the total collected do nothing but go up.
Yet "68% of respondents said the current tax system benefits the rich and is unfair to ordinary workers."
The media should be so proud of their ability to thoroughly misinform such a large percentage of the public into this state of pitiful ignorance.
Joseph Goebbels would be tremendously pleased.
*****Update: The link for the CBO data is no longer functioning due to a recent update to include 2007 numbers. Here's the new link.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
I sent our taxes off this morning....
Submitted by bigdaddy on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 10:36am.
...and felt a certain pride well up inside. When I thought of all the GSA employees, Secret Service Agents, and Hookers from around the world that are counting on us, I just had to say, "Checques In The Mail!"
The only thing that would
Submitted by BrianS on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 11:03am.
The only thing that would make this article more convincing is showing the actual income quintile ranges for each year and how they have also changed over time. My guess would be that they are going up each year.
Can't even get our "friendly" media to report.
Submitted by tolstoyx on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 11:09am.
I have submitted several articles to Lucianne.com and they have been accepted without question but this morning I tried to submit something from WND.com and it blanked out and said that they didn't accept submissions from that url. Does anyone know why?
Here is the link I tried to submit.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/04/obama-lawyer-birth-certificate-irrelevant-to-...
What is with so many Americans?
Submitted by Cappmann1962 on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 11:16am.
How many times do they have to be beaten on the head with the actual numbers? Sure, the wealthy have tax loopholes that most of us can't get, but they still pay the vast majority of taxes in this country.
Why are the almost 50% of Americans who pay ZERO taxes never addressed? And what is the correlation to the amount the wealthy pay vs. the timeline of Americans dropping off the tax rolls? The top 5% who paid 56% in 1979 paid 69% in 2006. The top 1% went from 15% in 1979 to 28% in 2006. What was the percentage of people paying ZERO taxes in 1979 and what was it in 2006? Could that perhaps be part of the reason tax revenues have dropped?
If Obambi wants to talk about fairness, then he needs to regroup on the lower 50%, and stop making everyone else pay the lower half's "fair share" for them. Of course, it will never be discussed, let alone addressed since these people are the democrat's hard-core base. Anyone who wants to take a single penny out of THEIR pockets is automatically the enemy. Where conservatives say "Where's the job?", liberals say "Where's MY money?". Conservatives want to earn their money, and then keep it to do with as they will. Liberals want "someone" to GIVE them their money, without caring where it comes from.
It all comes down to pride. Now, THAT's a statistic I'd like to see - what are the percentages of self-identified liberals and conservatives on welfare? The answer won't likely be surprising...
The right complains about
Submitted by CM on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 11:29am.
The right complains about Obama's use of class warfare against the rich yet they have no problem using class warfare against the poor. I don't see what you accomplish by attacking poor people. You can't get money out of a stone.
I remember when John Boehner became speaker he said nobody's taxes should be raised. I was in full agreement. What happened to that?
The point, CM
Submitted by Blonde on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 11:36am.
....is that there are SO MANY handouts that "the poor" aren't so poor. It's infuriating to see them with their food stamp cards, buying all sorts of luxury food items, then wheel them out to a brand new car, whilst sporting $150 sneakers and a $50 manicure.
Three years of Obama's handouts have vastly enlarged the entitlement class. Enough already. We "righties" have no problem with a basic safety net, but don't ask us to fund flat screen TV's, Escalades, and satellite TV, birth control, and abortions for healthy adults who could get off their asses and provide for themselves.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Blonde, EXACTLY!!! Keep the
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 12:08pm.
Blonde,
EXACTLY!!!
Keep the safety net for those who truly needed, but I see it all the time in Chicago, too many "poor" who have 50 inch televisions, all the channels of cable televisions, have lavish dinners on a daily basis, have the latest cars.
What Liberals do not realize that their insistant that entitlements should grow is endangering those who need the safety net. Liberals are endangering the safety net.
and as I say below, which not too many people know and those who do know, do not speak much about it. "Poor" Americans who move back to their native nation and live like queens and kings off entitlement programs.
You nailed it, Blonde
Submitted by Galvanic on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 1:25pm.
We provide a lot of services to those below and above the poverty line.
- Medicaid = full health care services
- SNAP = Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, replace food stamps. We may be the only nation in the world where the poor have an obesity problem.
- EITC = Earned Income Tax Credit -- a check (free money) to people who didn't earn enough to pay Federal income tax
- S-CHIP = state child health insurance program provides HHS matching funds to states operating medical care subsidy programs for children in families earning up to $94,000/year
And over 40% of Americans pay no Federal income tax. The rest of us pay for these programs with our income tax, and 68% of those polled said the system favors the rich? I'd like to know how many of the 68% actually paid Federal income tax.
Their Money
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 2:56pm.
I would be willing to wager, that 90+% of EITC recipients would refer to this free money as their "Tax Refund" and would argue till their blue in the face that it's not welfare.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
You're likely right about that, K-fish
Submitted by Galvanic on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 3:42pm.
And most of those would spend it on lottery tickets.
Minimum wage worker, head of household of 4:
Submitted by SickofLibs on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 1:10pm.
MORE disposable income than a professional with a $60,000 salary.
CM, War against the poor?
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 11:55am.
CM,
War against the poor? What complete nonsense are you talking about?!
The war is against the Middle Class being carried out by both Republicans and Democrat politicians.
The Rich in America, they can afford what ever they wish. The Poor, they have all types of government assistant programs which allows them to live comfortably. But the Middle Class, well many of us live pay check to pay check and not because we over spent, or buy unnecessary things, but because we have to put food on the table, pay rent or mortgage, etc.
Let me tell you the story of a few middle class families that I know versus that of poor families I know.
Middle Class family of four earns $60,000 yearly income. They pay rent, one car payment, have children in private school. At the end of the month, after paying all bills, only having netflix as "extra", not eating out, no cable television, not buying junk food, etc. they have about $200 left of the pay checks.
Poor family of four earns $20,000 yearly income. They also get housing assistant, food stamps, tuition assistant for the same private school as family of poor above. They have cable, internet, they eat out all the time, take monthly trips to another State about 5 hours away. Have assistance to pay utility bills. They go out to the movies, have latest clothes, WII system, latest games for the system. The only thing that the family of four above which the poor family does not have, is a two year old car. Poor family chose to have a 5 year old car. AT the end of the month, poor family has $1,000 disposable income.
I also know "poor" families in which man and woman live together, but in order to get the most assistant possible from the government, from churches, from anyone and everything, they do not get married so the mother can claim she is a single mother!!!!! The father earns about $50,000 a year, the mother maybe $10,000 or less. But they don't have to combine their income when applying for government help since they aren't married!!!
I also know countless of "poor" families, who came to the USA became legal residents, moved back to Egypt, Mexico, Venezuela, etc and now they collect unemployment benefits and other benefits. They live like kings and queens in their home country while giving no return to the American economy. You Liberals are such naive individuals!!!!!!
While there are truly poor people, these are being hurt by the countless of families like the "poor" family I speak of here.
My problem with the growing
Submitted by SSix2 on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 1:06pm.
My problem with the growing number of people who do not pay fed income tax is, what is the incentive for them to stop voting for people who want raise taxes on other people and promise to give more entitlements to those that pay nothing? What happens when the number of people that pay nothing gets over 50%? That party will have a majority of people who MUST vote for them. I have read the current number range from 42% to 48%. Both parties do it and to me it's all a big power grab by the then elected gov officials.
Personally, I think everyone should pay something then everyone has something at stake. Either get rid of the income tax and replace with consumption tax or go to flat tax that starts when your income is above 30k. Both are simple and transparent. But it will never happen because it makes to much sense and to difficult to manipulate.
THAT's the entire point Six
Submitted by Cappmann1962 on Wed, 04/18/2012 - 8:17am.
The libs may be, and are, many things, but stupid isn't one of them. They know enough about human nature to have planned, decades ago, the creation of an entitlement base. They know that human nature dictates that people who are given whatever they want, encouraged not to work while still getting a check, and brainwashed on a daily basis about those heinous conservatives who want to take all their money away and leave them homeless and broke, will ALWAYS vote for democrats. The libs have created and expanded a generational welfare class who will never deviate from their party line. They line up like little lemmings, get spoon-fed their information from liberal media, collect their checks and other "free" stuff, and ALWAYS vote for the dem. And none of them can begin to understand why the rest of the people who actually work for their money complain about supporting the welfare class. It never enters their minds that people who work for a living might actually want to KEEP the money they EARNED. All they know is what they've been told for generations - they're "entitled" to all these freebies and conservatives want to take away what's THEIRS.
The same goes for those who pay ZERO income tax. They don't pay for these giveaways, so they don't see the problem or feel the pain in their wallets. They don't feel the anger of those who are forced to support deadbeats who have as much opportunity to advance as anyone else, yet adamantly refuse to do so. This welfare class is perfectly willing, indeed encouraged, to sit on their asses and collect their checks, as long as they vote democrat every election.
Spot on
Submitted by SSix2 on Wed, 04/25/2012 - 8:28pm.
I saw this today and thought about this discussion
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/04/25/house_dem_unemployed_w...
About 42s in the Rep from PA makes our exact point.
The link to the CBO is not
Submitted by MrSnuggles on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 11:20am.
The link to the CBO is not working and I can't find the info on their site.
Nevermind, here is the correct link: http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collections/tax/2009/tax_liability_share...
The answer is ....(drumroll)
Submitted by texastommy on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 11:20am.
The answer is ....(drumroll) ..... Flat tax. No deductions. Screw everybody.
Concur
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 12:38pm.
I agree whole heartily. Except with the "screw everybody" comment. In the long run, people will not be screwed if they do not get their EIC or WIC cards or whatever. They will be incented to do something with their lives and become successes, as opposed to failures sucking off the productivity of their "neighbor".
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Screw the Flat Tax, as it allows the continued existence...
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 8:41pm.
...of the tyrannical IRS.
There is only one tax plan that will rid us of this illegal cabal of armed government goons once-and-for-all.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
The left would say...
Submitted by DumbCanuck on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 11:21am.
...how much does the rich pay relative to their income, compared to the middle class, and the less well-off?
You see, to the left, the tax system isn't [progressive] enough, thus the myth is perpetuated.
(I must grudgingly admit, though, that on this issue, they may have a valid point worth considering. If I'm drinking a little bit too much Kool-Aid, I trust you'll set me straight, but for now, I need to think about this some more.
"There... Are... Four... Lights!"
I believe the left thinks
Submitted by SSix2 on Wed, 04/25/2012 - 8:45pm.
I believe the left thinks that all money is the governments. People who "make" more are taking more than their fair share from others and therefore the money needs to be redistributed via entitlement programs.
Sad
Submitted by Reggie on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 11:24am.
Ignorance is the left's best friend. The income tax code "favors" the 48% who pay no income taxes.
Really? If that's the case
Submitted by CM on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 11:33am.
Really? If that's the case then why don't you offer to trade salaries with one of those 48%? Let them get stuck with the tax burden and you get to be favored.
CM, I was one of those 48%
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 11:44am.
CM,
I was one of those 48% right out of college earning a salary that led me not to pay income taxes!!!
I found it ridiculous since with what I earned, I had MORE than enough to survive on and take care of others.
You present, like the Left, a false argument.
I had a debate with a Liberal friend of mine about this. He was having a heart attack because Indiana dares to place a $205 year tax on $20,000 income of a family. He was besides himself , how dare the State of Indiana tax the income of a low income family. What he didn't talk about, just like you, that a family of four earning $20,000, after all the government help, federal tax breaks, etc., has more disposable income than a family of four which earns $60,000. It is the dirty little secret indidivudals like you, CM, don't want anyone to know.
by the way, back during the Regan years, for Democrats, $60,000 yearly income was considered rich!!!
Reply to CM and salary trade
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 12:45pm.
I tried that the other day CM. I offered to trade my salary to a person I know who games the handout system. They thought that was a great idea, until I told them they had to do something they were unwilling to do. Work.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
I told our church the rich
Submitted by okie-pastor on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 11:29am.
I told our church the rich pay the majority of taxes in America and you would have thought that I told them I saw a leprechaun riding a unicorn.
Showed them the article from limbaughs website from New York Times and they were amazed.
➚ Amazing, ain't it?
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 11:40am.
Our church, like most, has members who are more wealthy than others.
They also tithe and offer according to God's plan. Gosh, you'd think they got that way by giving.
Do I understand correctly, Pastor...
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 11:56am.
that your congregation believes most of the tax revenue collected by the federal government is furnished by the nation's poor?
Jer
okie-pastor, I have had the
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 12:03pm.
okie-pastor,
I have had the same conversation with friends, even Republican friends, who thought that the poor paid the vast amount of taxes in America.
It is amazing how the media, Liberals, Hollywood, Obama, etc have been able to lie to the American people about our tax system.
Liberallies...I cannot believe you have friends who are
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 1:31pm.
that ignorant.
There is a difference between believing the tax code favors the rich versus thinking the poor "pay the vast amount of taxes in America". I hear a lot of opinion expressed along the lines of the first proposition but very little regarding the second.
Look, the average secretary making 35 grand a year subsists on a razor-thin margin, living literally paycheck to paycheck. Unforeseen financial demands can be absolutely devastating. And every nickel paid in taxes squeezes the margin that much more, even though the amount he or she sends to the treasury is miniscule in comparison to what a Warren Buffet is obligated. The distinction of course is that a modest hike in Buffet's tax rate means only that he is then forced to get by on, say, 50 mil a year instead of 55 mil. Let's face it. That added "burden" won't impact even the most opulent lifestyle in the slightest. After all, the billionaire and the millionaire can buy a carton of eggs and a gallon of gas for the same price charged to a school teacher earning infinitely less.
Obviously, Buffet is an extreme example, but it illustrates the point. It's the middle class which is currently caught in the economic vice. Now, there may be a plausible argument that 200-250 thousand is too low of a threshold for any increase in the present rates to kick in, but there ought to be an identifiable and agreeable point at which a moderate hike could in no way be reasonably deemed as onerous or punitive or as a disincentive for investment.
Jer
Jer, If you read what I said
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 2:48pm.
Jer,
If you read what I said in above posts, I 100% agree that it is the Middle Class which is getting screwed over in many more ways than one when it comes to taxes, entitlements, etc.
However, let's face it, the Buffet Rule, as it has been proven, will do ZERO, NOTHING, NILCH, NADA when it comes to bringing down the defeceit, balancing our budget, etc.
The Buffet Rule is just, and I wish Liberals like you would finally admit it the truth on this, one more tool in Obama's arsenal to divide people along economic classes.
And please explain this, if taxes present such a burden on the middle class, which I agree, why is it that cities like Chicago, States like Illinois, New York City, NY State, L.A., California have ridiculously high cost to city stickers, parking fines, speeding tickets, licensing your car, etc. People talk about taxes being high for the middle class, but who do you think, once again, gets screwed over with the incredibly high cost to pay fines? Middle Class and guess which party in Illinois, New York, California, Washington, etc, etc have been raising fines, cost of getting drivere's license, cost of getting a plate for your car, cost of paying a parking ticket, cost of paying a moving violation, etc, etc, etc? Liberals and Democrats!!!!
So, if your secretary who earns $35,000 a year all of a sudden gets a speeding ticket in Illinois, she is out almost $400, if she gets a parking ticket, she is out $100, in order to pay her renewel for her license, she is out over $100, to get a city sticker for her car in Chicago, she is out over $120 dollars. Geez, if Liberals and Democrats who run cities like Chicago truly cared for the middle class....they wouldn't make such fines and the price of doing business with Chicago so incredibly high.
This is why I know Democrats and Liberals are all talk and could careless about the middle class and poor. The rich can pay fines, etc. the middle class and the poor...incredibly hard. Your $35,000 0 a year secretary will have a harder time dealing with the City of Chicago and the State of Illinois than paying her federal income taxes!
Softball Question
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 3:02pm.
Why are fines so high in big cities? If you know the right people, and you are politically connected, you don't have to pay the fine. Yes, it's just that simple. But like the mortician in the movie, "The Godfather", it's implied that you are now on the hook for a return of favor. And when the time comes, you will pay up.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Jer, by the way, I didn't
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 2:55pm.
Jer,
by the way, I didn't address your, "...I can't believe you have friends that dumb...." unfortunately, yes I do and most of them are Liberals.
i work at a university and most of the individuals who think that the rich don't pay their fair share like the poor are paying, are the university professors I work with! 99% of ultra radical Liberals. This is why I have very little respect for PhDs, Masters degrees, etc. They don't create better educated individuals, today most of these degrees create better brainwashed Liberals! LOL
and don't get me started on law degrees....hahaha...I had to through the jab Jer. :-)
They get very shocked when I go and find the FACT that 48% of Americans, which many are FAR from poor, do not pay federal income taxes. Of course, once you show them that, they start the spin doctor routine. "Well, Liberallies, they don't pay federal income tax, but they pay taxes on goods they buy, State taxes, S.S. taxes, etc., etc."
Liberallies..then I guess we southern libs must be smarter than
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 3:23pm.
the northern variety.
"Fair share" is by definition a subjective judgment, i.e., in the eye of the beholder. As far as your closing comment, it is of course a good and accurate point, but your radical professor friends are not completely out to lunch. Many of those types of fees and taxes referenced do indeed affect the lower income groups disproportionately.
Jer
Jer, Glad we agree that
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 3:46pm.
Jer,
Glad we agree that "fair share" is a subjective judgement. Interesting enough, if you hear Obama's speeches, he constantly throws out this term, "fair share". So, it is something that agrees with Liberals, if not he would not use it.
My reply to the professors when they point out that the middle class and poor do pay State income taxes, S.S. taxes, Medicaid taxes is....we will ALL use State services, social security, medicare at some point in our life, so why shouldn't we ALL pay into it?
By the way, Illinois State incom taxes, were risen by Governor Pat Quinn in 2010. Guess what it has done to bring Illinois back on the black? NOTHING!!!! in fact, it has moved Illionois deeper into the red because as it is obvious to everyone, but Liberals. When politicians receive more money, they don't use it to balance budgets, brind down defeceits. They use it for entitlement programs and pet projects to get re-elected.
I ask you Jer, if raising taxes is the answer, why hasn't it work in Illinois, California, New York, Washington, etc, etc.? If raising taxes is the answer why is it that we have example after example of NOT working?
but yes, I do know that the Northern variety Liberals are quite dumb, geez, they kept on electing Daley as Mayor of Chicago. Now they elected corrupt and immoral Rahm Emanuel as Mayor. Illinois is flat out broke, yet Illinois keeps on putting corrupt Democrats like Madigan in charge of the State of Illinois. Democrats have been in charge of the State of Illinois for decades and all they have done is bankrupt the State. And what is Pat Quinn and his cronies in the Illinois Congress doing? Raise the cost of fines, State fees, tollways, etc. Yes, northern Liberals are incredibly dumb to keep on electing Democratic politicians for the past few decades in Illinois which have taken Illinois to the brink of complete economic collapse.
Guess who it affects the most that tollway fees were raised from .40 cents to $2.00 dollars, $1.80 dollars, etc? The rich? NOPE, the middle class and the poor. Guess what I use less today thanks to the tollway fees going up? tollways!!!!
Democrats simply do not learn. What is the definition of insanity, to keep on doing the same thing over and over and over again with the same poor results. In other words, Liberalism, Democratic party!!
Liberallies...
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 5:35pm.
Sorry, buddy...I'll have to get back to this later. I had a computer systems failure and just now was able to reboot. I was in the middle of trying to read Noel's microscopic charts but I guess my eyes have gotten too old. Apparently, the theme is that the super rich are getting screwed because they are providing an increasing share of overall revenue.
Of course that may also be a natural consequence of the continuing trend toward a greater concentration of wealth in the upper strata of earners, especially the top one per cent of the population. The wider the disparity, the bigger will be the proportionate slice of revenue borne by taxpayers fortunate enough to be on the good side of the gap.
That said, the issue regarding the expansion of benefits to the lowest and lower income families to a level where they are arguably as well or better off than many middle class families deserves serious attention. I think we both agree that it is the middle which is holding the short stick.
Jer
Make the image bigger, Jer.
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 6:06pm.
Most web browsers have a function where you can make the image on your screen appear larger. Presto! Bingo!
If you can't figure it out, let us know what browser you are using and I bet we can help.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Jer
Submitted by stratman on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 6:03pm.
Unfair disadvantage - Al Sharpton and Sheila Jackson Lee were both born in boroughs of New York City, Remove those two morons and the North has a fighting chance.
Don't forget Cleveland has its own heavyweight at being a lightweight: Marcia Fudge. Unfortunately for her constituents there was no net gain in intelligence when Fudge replaced Stephanie Tubbs Jones. A vacant seat would literally benefit Clevelanders.
strat...I'll merely point out that
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 6:51pm.
...so long as the great state of Georgia is sustained by the intellectual ballast and nautical wizardry of Congressman Hank "Guam Could Capsize" Johnson, our collective genius will be a continual source for public wonderment.
Jer
Did Johnsnon Major In Bong During College?
Submitted by stratman on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 7:25pm.
I still marvel at the herculean effort it surely took for Adm. Robert Willard to maintain his composure during the tortured questioning by Johnson.
Amazing luck for Johnson that he ran against the aggressive stupidity of Cynthia McKinney.
I'm disappointed in you, Jer.
Submitted by Kingfish17 on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 3:05pm.
No one needs 50 million a year to get by. Nobody needs a billion dollar net worth. Why don't we just appoint someone like you to be king and you can tell us the upper limit on income and net worth.
"You can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas...on the taxpayer’s dime." Barack Obama
Why don't you tell me what you're talking about.
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 3:23pm.
Jer
Kingfish17, Very well
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 3:29pm.
Kingfish17,
Very well said!!!
Why don't we go farther, using Jer's, Liberals' logic.
A single guy with no responsabilities other than to feed himself and pays his bills, does he really need a $60,000 salary, $100,000/year salary?
My cousin is a pediatrician working Cook Count Hospital in Chicago. He is single, "all he really needs" is money for his rent, food and water, and utilities. Tell me Jer, how much does he need to get by? Is his $200,000/year salary too much? He doesn't need it? Should we tax him enough so he only uses $40,000 of his salary? How much is too much that one does need to get by?
Jer, this is what terrifies me about Liberals, in your mind you have decided what we all need to get by. Who are you, who are Liberals to not only tell us, but attempt to enforce how much anyone should live on?
I know you are not going to see it Jer, but your type of mentality, which is so engrained in the Liberal mind, is what keeps so many people from working hard today. Heck, according to you, no one needs a certain amount of money to get by. Why work hard, move up and earn higher and higher salaries? I started at $22,000 right out of college as single guy. It was MORE than enough to pay rent, food and utilities. Using your logic, Jer, I should have never worked hard and moved up in my field.
The government doesn't need to be in the business of telling anyone how much of their personal income is way too high unless the person stole it!!
I agree that those who have more, God will demand more from them, but the government should NOT be telling anyone how much is too much.
By the way Jer, I forgot to mention this to you a few weeks back. I was in Iowa and I saw a red Impala with the license plate, "Jer" on the highway. Why you following me on my business trips? LOL
Have you guys wandered off to some other website?
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 3:36pm.
You and Kingfish act like I've just advocated capping incomes at x level and then confiscating every penny which exceeds it. I didn't even remotely hint at any such absurdity.
Jer
Jer, You said, "The
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 5:21pm.
Jer,
You said, "The distinction of course is that a modest hike in Buffet's tax rate means only that he is then forced to get by on, say, 50 mil a year instead of 55 mil. Let's face it. That added "burden" won't impact even the most opulent lifestyle in the slightest. After all, the billionaire and the millionaire can buy a carton of eggs and a gallon of gas for the same price charged to a school teacher earning infinitely less."
Hmmm...anyone reading this can clearly asses that you are saying that a person making 55 million dollars should not cry when he is taxed 5 million of his 55 since he can easily get by with 50 million dollars.
Whether you ment to say it or not, you are advocating capping income at a level.
Who are you to say that an individual can get by with 5 million dollars less in his income of 55 mil?
You say that a 5 million tax on the 55 million dollar income is a "burden". C'mon Jer.
I know you will not be able to admit it, but you not only hint to what you now are calling an absurdity, but you put it straightforward for everyone to read it.
Who are you to force anyone, who are Liberals to say that a person who earns 55 million should get by 50 million instead? And you completely ignore the FACT that the Buffet rule is a gimmick which will do NOTHING for the economy.
Liberallies...
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 5:54pm.
You misunderstood me. Maybe I should have explained in more detail, but it will have to wait.
Jer
Jer, tax increases aren't going to make a difference...
Submitted by Phryj1 on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 3:24pm.
...as long as one party steadfastly refuses to cut spending or allow reforms of entitlement programs. We're spending way too much, yet the Dems try to claim we're just not collecting enough taxes. And we already know how any 'deal' regarding tax increases and spending cuts with the Dems will turn out: Dems get the tax hike they want, then completely fail to make a meaningful dent in spending.
I have to ask, do you really think that's sustainable? Constantly spending more and taxing more? We're already literally spending money that doesn't even exist yet, and Dems have made it abundantly clear that they aren't going to stop as long as they have any power in the gov't and influence in the media. The fact that they're willing to outright lie about how fair our tax code is shows that they think jacking up taxes is the only 'solution' to the debt problem, and they won't even consider spending less. They also keep blocking a balanced budget amendment. Isn't it reckless to act like you can always take more money from the taxpayers? One of the biggest reasons the economy is sluggish right now is because businesses are worried about tax increases. Historically, higher taxes have been shown to hurt growth. Isn't there a certain point where you really shouldn't raise taxes any more? Because it sure seems like Dems don't believe that.
Not to mention, but continually borrowing money (again, money that doesn't exist yet) from the federal reserve is devaluing the dollar, leading to higher costs of living and actually making things worse for the middle class. If making things easier for the middle class is the goal, shouldn't putting a stop to deficit spending be top priority? The Dems are more interested in playing political games than actually helping the middle class.
Dems lay two options on the table: higher taxes or deficit spending. Neither of these is good for ANYONE in the country in the long run, yet, Dems are hellbent on preventing meaningful spending cuts at all costs. Do you honestly think we can keep that up?
Progressives seem to be completely averse to facts and logic. Apparently, reality has a conservative bias.
Phryj1
Submitted by Jer on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 5:49pm.
I read your post. Short answer. I agree with most of what you say. I don't agree with the implication that the administration has unconditionally rejected any cuts in spending. To what extent the cuts are meaningful and sufficient is another matter. The Republicans as expected insist they are not. The opposite side of the same coin is revenue and the GOP is playing a similar game over taxes, although they seem even more intransigent in that area than do the Dems on spending. It's way past time for both sides to stop the game-playing. I'm not holding my breath. Please don't hold yours.
Later,
Jer
Joseph Goebbels would be tremendously pleased.
Submitted by Conservator on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 11:42am.
As would be Obama's idol - Saul Alinsky who authored the Democratic playbook, "Rules for Radicals." BTW, this was an excellent article and I applaud the great work that MCR, NewsBusters, CNS News, etc. provide daily.
Leftist Deduction Catch-22
Submitted by HardRightTurn on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 12:12pm.
Leftists are indirectly responsible for whatever net tax rate anyone, not only the wealthy, ends up paying. Any taxpayer can take advantage of the Left's 'social engineering' tax deductions and credits. But then, the Left turns around and damns them for doing so.
My advice to taxpayers is to 'go Galt'. Don't buy into the Left's social engineering taxtics. Just pay the additional taxes in lieu of contributing to the Left's causes. That ought to shut them up post haste.
To more fully comprehend the Left, one must read “Leftism As Psychopathy” by John Ray, M.A., Ph.D. Caution, it might scare you a little bit.
http://jonjayray.tripod.com/psycho.html
Ahhh
Submitted by CO2Maker on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 12:59pm.
Another person slumming it at Dissecting Leftism and other of Ray's blogs. I routinely read DL, Tongue Tied, Greenie Watch, Education Watch International, and Political Correctness International. I check the others from time to time.
FWIW, another good blog is Junk Science:
http://junkscience.com/
Tithe?
Submitted by CO2Maker on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 12:33pm.
Isn't a tithe—10% for everybody—a flat tax?
What's wrong with that?
But I agree with the President. Make 'em pay their fair share, starting with the bottom quintile. Make it $100 from each tax unit (individual, household) at the lowest sector, then gradually up it. Everyone must *pay* it, not just factor it in against any transfers. Pay the tax, write a check, then everyone will know they have contributed to the government of the country.
What can you buy with $100? One trendy Nike shoe (not a pair!). Two double cheeseburgers at McDonald's every week for a year. Six pairs of Wranglers at Walmart. Six CDs (or whatever they call them these days). Five movies for two.
I heard that in the 70's
Submitted by CobraMan on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 12:43pm.
This isn't a new belief, that the rich benefit from the country more than anyone else. It was actually used in the early 30's to get Income Tax itself passed. This class " inequity" argument was used as a weapon to get the Constitution itself amended. It is amazing is that, even after 75 years, the "inequity" remains, the poor are still, poor, the rich are still rich, and the middle class pays for everything while the government piles up more and more deficits, more and more debt, each and every year.
So, despite a 75 year track record of "equality" failure, of "balanced budget" failures, what's the "magic fix?' RAISE income tax collections from the rich! Just like they did in the late sixties and the entire seventies, which brought us a 10 year recession, perpetual unemployment for a large percentage of the population, an expantion of the number of "poor people" in America, and a brand new category of economic indicators: the misery index! Yea, like that will work!
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution
Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court
Or Anwar al-Awlaki.
But Here is Why We Need More Food Stamps & Handouts, People..
Submitted by Motormouth KOS on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 1:19pm.
You conservatives are heartless.
You just want dirty air, and gas-guzzling SUVs to drive.
Do you have any idea how much the new Air Jordans cost? ($179.99)
Have you any clue about how much a smart phone with a meaty data plan costs? ($120.00/month)
Do you know how much a Chevy Volt costs? ($44,000)
Do you know how much a 12-pack of Colt 45 costs?
Gimme my Obama-bucks, biotch!!
The Obamination... A crisis leading to a catastrophe..(please donate to MRC)
Stoppppp!
Submitted by CO2Maker on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 3:18pm.
You made a gun reference! You're like the Houston Astros who wanted to wear their old, militant, scary Colt 45 jerseys. Yeaaaagggghhhh! You want Gabby Giffords killed! You're racists!
Make 'I'm stop, George!
New Baracko campaign slogan...
Submitted by bigdaddy on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 6:14pm.
..."All you need is a Chevy Volt and a 12-pack of Colt..."
Now the Occupy Crowd has their mantra for this summer.
The government "educators" have finally gotten the country...
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 04/17/2012 - 1:22pm.
...they have been pining for for the last 100 years.
-A nation full of stoopid dumbmasses.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November