Top 1% paying high % tax than ever before
- Thread starter Topspin
- Start date
http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/indtaxstats/article/0,,id=129270,00.html
According to table 6 for 2004 the top 10% makes 44% of all income and they pay 68% of all federal taxes. I think its better to go off of IRS stats.
According to table 6 for 2004 the top 10% makes 44% of all income and they pay 68% of all federal taxes. I think its better to go off of IRS stats.
uscitizen
Villified User
the losers in the market spin, everyone cannot be winners.
Btw All rich people are not pricks, Just most. Ever know MR. Oxley of Occidental petro ? Nice old country boy but loaded.
Guy down the raad is loaded, owns a chain of furniture stores. Just another ol farmer around here.
I grew up around lots of coal millionaires, some went to school with me and never finished high school.
Never judge a book by it's cover Spinner.
A good education is a great thing, but no guarantee to riches.
Btw All rich people are not pricks, Just most. Ever know MR. Oxley of Occidental petro ? Nice old country boy but loaded.
Guy down the raad is loaded, owns a chain of furniture stores. Just another ol farmer around here.
I grew up around lots of coal millionaires, some went to school with me and never finished high school.
Never judge a book by it's cover Spinner.
A good education is a great thing, but no guarantee to riches.
Last edited:
I blame it on the war ma$hine and outsourcing personally.
uscitizen
Villified User
Spin a million is just not what it used to be. When a millionalire ment something the average home was worth 30K or so.
I have at least 20 good friends that are worth more than a million. Most of it is in land and homes, buildings, equipment, livestock, though not cash. But they just make a reasonable living off of the land.
ps none of those millionaires belong to the country club
They are good people and know the value of self worth.
ps it is not about money.
I have at least 20 good friends that are worth more than a million. Most of it is in land and homes, buildings, equipment, livestock, though not cash. But they just make a reasonable living off of the land.
ps none of those millionaires belong to the country club
They are good people and know the value of self worth.
ps it is not about money.
This is a sad and silly way to view it, IMO. That the million isn't "what it used to be" is much like the "I walked 17 miles to school, uphill, both ways!" stories.Spin a million is just not what it used to be. When a millionalire ment something the average home was worth 30K or so.
I have at least 20 good friends that are worth more than a million. Most of it is in land and homes, buildings, equipment, livestock, though not cash. But they just make a reasonable living off of the land.
ps none of those millionaires belong to the country club
They are good people and know the value of self worth.
ps it is not about money.
It is a great number to achieve whether it be in worth, or in actual spending power. To say otherwise denies the significance of the achievement, it is designed to make others feel better for being barely ten-thousandaires...
Litmus
Verified User
But a million isn't what it used to be. That's just true, dude.
Last edited:
Yes, but just saying that doesn't take from the significance of the accomplishment.
You really are a negative-Nelly! I mean, when all you can post is how terrible something is, and how the world is falling apart.....
It must be difficult for you to find a reason to wake up in the morning. For me the world's negatives are far outweighed by the myriad positives.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
"the top 1% are capturing more and more of the income wealth total in this country....thus, even with a lower tax rate, they are paying more of the income tax total."
Wealth is not "Captured".
Wealth is not "Captured".
Litmus
Verified User
nitpicking on word choice is not a good argument. Pretend he had written "earned". Now what do you have to say?
"Captured" leaves an idea that because they have it, it means that others have no ability to get it. It is the fundamental idea behind the "zero-sum" economic model where if one gets rich everybody else must be getting poorer. It doesn't reflect reality. How an idea is presented can play into propaganda. To ignore the presentation is denial.
Litmus
Verified User
Of course that sort of slight linguistic coloration DOES carry insinuations, but to point that out and ignore the MAIN argument is a weak post at best.
Does he disagree with the MAIN point that they are paying more because they're earning disproportinately more as well? Were don't know. And so the main point goes basically unaddressed. It's weak. It's called nitpicking.
FUCK THE POLICE
911 EVERY DAY
I pulled that part out becuase I held more objection to it than I did the main point of the argument. I didn't really disagree with the main argument.
Of course the rich will earn disproportionally more than your average person... that's why their rich. And of course they're going to make more than an employee, because they are the risk takers of the enterprise and therefore they earn the profit. The main reason they pay about 20% of the taxes more than they earn is because of, obviously, the progressive income tax. I've never really held any bones with the tax. My only real one is that it makes the government easier to grow because it's far easier to justifiably raise taxes - you can just do it to the people who won't mind as much. This is also one of the main reasons people have argued for it.