Record Numbers of People Paying No Income Tax

I argued with someone about that once, i said fine, lets throw out the income tax and make up the loss of tax revenue by increasing tax on something else. He shut up.
 
[quote name='SpazX']I thought it was 35%[/QUOTE]

35% is for individual income tax. Corporate tax is different.

"When you add in state taxes, the U.S. has the highest tax burden among industrialized countries," says Hodge. In contrast, China's rate is just 25%; Ireland's is 12.5%.

So if you go along with what you guys are saying about health care, "why do we spend so much money and not get nearly as much out of it as other countries that spend less" then can't we say we tax our people more than any other country and we do not get nearly as much out of it as other countries that tax less?
 
[quote name='Knoell']I did read the article, but why do they have to use those tricks? Is it because they are profit hogging hate mongerers, or is it because paying half their profit to the US government would hurt them. I do agree they should pay the taxes, but I also do not agree that they should have to pay HALF their earnings or profit.[/QUOTE]

I didn't say they were profit hogging hate mongerers. They used the tricks because they could pay less taxes that way. Of course paying more taxes hurts their bottom line, just like it hurts the bottom line of the rest of us. The question is, are their actions fair? They may be legal (I'm not a tax attorney), but are they fair? The answer is clearly no, since they pay nothing and others pay a lot. I'm saying our system needs to be fixed because it results in this unfairness. Do you disagree?
 
[quote name='elprincipe']I didn't say they were profit hogging hate mongerers. They used the tricks because they could pay less taxes that way. Of course paying more taxes hurts their bottom line, just like it hurts the bottom line of the rest of us. The question is, are their actions fair? They may be legal (I'm not a tax attorney), but are they fair? The answer is clearly no, since they pay nothing and others pay a lot. I'm saying our system needs to be fixed because it results in this unfairness. Do you disagree?[/QUOTE]

No I do not disagree, but I do think the burden of the taxes that they have to pay is too much. Lower tax rates and let's see how much money comes into the US.

If they lowered the tax rate to a bearable amount, wouldn't the money that these corporations pay to the US be greater than the nothing they are paying now? We have the highest tax rate of industrialized nations, why not lower it, and maybe companies will want to keep the money here.
 
[quote name='Knoell']No I do not disagree, but I do think the burden of the taxes that they have to pay is too much. Lower tax rates and let's see how much money comes into the US.

If they lowered the tax rate to a bearable amount, wouldn't the money that these corporations pay to the US be greater than the nothing they are paying now? We have the highest tax rate of industrialized nations, why not lower it, and maybe companies will want to keep the money here.[/QUOTE]

Why would lowering taxes on something that doesn't pay taxes reverse outsourcing?

Is FICA the only difference between my wage and Poonjab's?
 
[quote name='Knoell']No I do not disagree, but I do think the burden of the taxes that they have to pay is too much. Lower tax rates and let's see how much money comes into the US.

If they lowered the tax rate to a bearable amount, wouldn't the money that these corporations pay to the US be greater than the nothing they are paying now? We have the highest tax rate of industrialized nations, why not lower it, and maybe companies will want to keep the money here.[/QUOTE]

I'm sorry but you have WAY too much faith in corporations.
 
[quote name='Knoell']No I do not disagree, but I do think the burden of the taxes that they have to pay is too much. Lower tax rates and let's see how much money comes into the US.

If they lowered the tax rate to a bearable amount, wouldn't the money that these corporations pay to the US be greater than the nothing they are paying now? We have the highest tax rate of industrialized nations, why not lower it, and maybe companies will want to keep the money here.[/QUOTE]
What you don't realize is that the ruling mentality among these corporations is simply to make as much money as they can, at any means necessary. They no longer owe any allegiance to any nation or people, and as such have no problem exploiting groups of people to make a lot of money. If you were to lower taxes in the US for businesses, it would do nothing to fix this problem, as they don't pay taxes in the first place here. They simply use globalization in order to pay little to nothing in taxes, and get cheap labor. In the end, everyone is screwed over.
 
[quote name='Knoell']No I do not disagree, but I do think the burden of the taxes that they have to pay is too much. Lower tax rates and let's see how much money comes into the US.

If they lowered the tax rate to a bearable amount, wouldn't the money that these corporations pay to the US be greater than the nothing they are paying now? We have the highest tax rate of industrialized nations, why not lower it, and maybe companies will want to keep the money here.[/QUOTE]

I agree our corporate tax rate is too high and would like to see it lowered to boost our competitiveness. However, we need to do something to prevent corporations from making money here and not paying taxes due to accounting tricks.
 
Those corporations may not be paying taxes here, but they DO pay taxes to the other countries that they have operations in. The reason they base the ones that lose money here is because our tax rate is higher than the ones in those other countries. You lower the tax rate here, and they will base their operations here.

You cannot stand directly in the path of capitalism and expect businesses to want to do business with you.
 
Except they didnt really start leaving until free trade which began largely under Reagan. We had plenty of business here when the tax rates were obscenely high. They couldnt go overseas no matter what the accumulation of reasons (low labor prices, low tax rates, lax environmental standards, human rights violations, etc), because if they wanted to sell to Americans, they had to play by our rules.
 
[quote name='Archfiend']Income tax for one is illegal, there is no law that requires you to pay income taxes. Our Constitution strictly prohibits taxing of labor.

I will say it again... there is no law for income tax. It is a scam.

Find me the law and I will give you 1000000000000000 rep.[/QUOTE]

Amendment 16 - Status of Income Tax Clarified
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
 
All businesses tend to pass costs on to customers
Click to expand...


I'm not sure how you tax crybabies don't understand this, or choose to deny it.

And taxes are paid on corporate earnings. Mom and Pop pay income tax on the dividends they get from all those big, bad companies that want to destroy us. Uncle Sam also takes tax out of the checks on all the engineers, consultants, designers, painters, and ditch diggers that work for these companies along with the companies' share of the FICA, medicare "contributions".

Plus, the income tax on all those rich CEO's are funding 95% of all our precious government services. So now we can finally dispel the myth that the rich don't pay any taxes just like the big, bad, earth destroying companies. They do. You reap the benefits in the form of new bullet trains, highways, and crappy hot lunches. You should be thanking them instead of pissing on them.

Let's also keep in mind all the other taxes corporations DO pay even though the may avoid the federal income tax. Have a building? Pay a property tax. Lights, phones, vehicles, gasoline, equipment? They're paying the excise taxes, import taxes, sales taxes, recovery taxes, fuel taxes, airport tax, docking tax. There's simply no way to avoid paying taxes altogether unless you can pass your cost of those taxes onto your customer. And that customer doesn't even realize they're the ones who are really paying the tax.
 
[quote name='ExxonMobile CEO'] I'm not sure how you tax crybabies don't understand this, or choose to deny it.

And taxes are paid on corporate earnings. Mom and Pop pay income tax on the dividends they get from all those big, bad companies that want to destroy us. Uncle Sam also takes tax out of the checks on all the engineers, consultants, designers, painters, and ditch diggers that work for these companies along with the companies' share of the FICA, medicare "contributions".

Plus, the income tax on all those rich CEO's are funding 95% of all our precious government services. So now we can finally dispel the myth that the rich don't pay any taxes just like the big, bad, earth destroying companies. They do. You reap the benefits in the form of new bullet trains, highways, and crappy hot lunches. You should be thanking them instead of pissing on them.

Let's also keep in mind all the other taxes corporations DO pay even though the may avoid the federal income tax. Have a building? Pay a property tax. Lights, phones, vehicles, gasoline, equipment? They're paying the excise taxes, import taxes, sales taxes, recovery taxes, fuel taxes, airport tax, docking tax. There's simply no way to avoid paying taxes altogether unless you can pass your cost of those taxes onto your customer. And that customer doesn't even realize they're the ones who are really paying the tax.[/QUOTE]

Wow, cool defense of corporations avoiding paying taxes in this country brah.
 
You guys would be amazed at how many people work under the table and pay no taxes, yet benefit from government programs that our tax dollars pay for. I know quite a few people that get by by doing odd jobs, roofing, whatever. They get a couple hundred bucks and just pocket it. Then they go get food stamps. Then they just go to the emergency room for problems. They are declared indigent and pay nothing because they have no traceable income. Everyone should pay income tax as long as there is an income tax on the books. Even if someone only pays $50 dollars, they should pay something.

I'd love to try the Fair Tax in a trial basis somewhere. Not because I am a Neal Boortz fanboy, but because I'd be willing to try almost anything compared to the overcomplicated morass things are now.
 
[quote name='Knoell']Those corporations may not be paying taxes here, but they DO pay taxes to the other countries that they have operations in. The reason they base the ones that lose money here is because our tax rate is higher than the ones in those other countries. You lower the tax rate here, and they will base their operations here.

You cannot stand directly in the path of capitalism and expect businesses to want to do business with you.[/QUOTE]

We should just ask them what they would like to be taxed. If we ask real nicely they might not be mad at us and actually give us 1 or 2%. I really don't want them to be mad though, so we should probably just give them more money rather than taxing them at all.
 
[quote name='speedracer']Seriously. When Clusterstock runs a post on how out of whack income is in this country, you know it's bad. I read em for my ultra-free-market news (they hate bailouts, socialism, and puppies) and even they are saying shit is jacked up.

15 Mind Blowing Facts About Wealth And Inequality In America[/QUOTE]

so how much do you want the top 1% to pay? 70% 90%?

do you think its reasonable for over a third of the country to be paying nothing? do you think revenues would increase if the taxes increased for the top 1% increased to 90%?
 
I think that the people at the bottom would pay more money if they had more money. The point is that the top 1% has such a large portion of the wealth and the rest certainly aren't gaining on them.
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']so how much do you want the top 1% to pay? 70% 90%? [/quote]
I think 40% is reasonable for the top income bracket. It's certainly charitable by historical standards.
do you think its reasonable for over a third of the country to be paying nothing?
Click to expand...
The EITC was raised precisely to help the lower and middle class. Is requiring them to pay a nontrivial amount some sort of moral victory?

Half of America has 2.5% of the wealth. Let that roll around and internalize dude. That's fucking mind blowing. Real wages have not increased in 50 years. Insanity.
if-you-arent-in-the-top-1-then-youre-getting-a-bum-deal.jpg

do you think revenues would increase if the taxes increased for the top 1% increased to 90%?
Click to expand...
Let's be reasonable. 90% isn't. Let's talk about reality.

income-tax-is-getting-lower-and-lower-for-the-rich.jpg
 
I don't know how many times this has to be said but all but poorest don't get taxed literally nothing.

At the very least not while what is contributed to Social Security is treated as general revenue.

They aren't getting taxed because they basically don't have enough to tax, not without severely effecting their ability to you know live and buy essentials and not much more.

Basically you guys are trying to make an argument our society benefits by allowing encouraging these enormous concentrations of wealth but you fail miserably, as the last 30 years has shown.

The only utility out of cutting the tax rate for the top 5% or so is they just use the money to buy influence to get more tax cuts.
 
Is there a follow up article about 15 mind blowing facts about entitlement mentality laziness corresponding to the growing so-called poor?

I jest.


I was pondering this morning - It's just funny to watch thread after thread come down to the same exact thing: Everyone agrees on a problem. One group thinks the most historically dishonest, inefficient, and corrupt entity on earth (government) is usually the only possible solution. The other group refuses that conclusion, and attempts to argue alternative solutions.

Just about every thread in this forum comes down to this, when you distill out all the personal attacks, witty retorts, and vulgar musings.

Anywho, just thinking out loud...
 
Except the alternate solutions you left out usually involve either letting private business handle a problem (yeah they're always honest) or letting the so-called free market handle it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='thrustbucket']I was pondering this morning - It's just funny to watch thread after thread come down to the same exact thing: Everyone agrees on a problem. One group thinks the most historically dishonest, inefficient, and corrupt entity on earth (government) is usually the only possible solution. The other group refuses that conclusion, and attempts to argue alternative solutions.

Just about every thread in this forum comes down to this, when you distill out all the personal attacks, witty retorts, and vulgar musings.

Anywho, just thinking out loud...[/QUOTE]

Government is more corrupt than corporations?

Government doesn't sleep in the same bed, drink at the same bars, eat at the same restaurants, cheat on the same frigid wives with the same hookers and have their legitimate offspring skip to the front of the line as corporations?
 
The difference is that, at leat in theory, the government is supposed to work for the people of the country, no corporation has any interest beyond it's own welfare aside from non-profits. Now we can argue all day about which is better at handling things, but at least we can be angry with the government when they screw us over, you can't really blame a company for fucking you if it helps the company.
 
[quote name='speedracer']I think 40% is reasonable for the top income bracket. It's certainly charitable by historical standards.

The EITC was raised precisely to help the lower and middle class. Is requiring them to pay a nontrivial amount some sort of moral victory?

Half of America has 2.5% of the wealth. Let that roll around and internalize dude. That's fucking mind blowing. Real wages have not increased in 50 years. Insanity.


Let's be reasonable. 90% isn't. Let's talk about reality.

[/QUOTE]

itll be just about 40% when obama doesnt renew the bush tax cuts. but how much will that help?

ED-AH556B_ranso_20080519194014.gif



yes, the EITC was raised to help the lower and middle class, part of those bush tax cuts everyone loves so much. and yes, having people pay a nontrivial amount of income tax is a moral victory. see friedman's four types of spending money.


90% is reality, it was 90% until rich friendly kennedy came along.
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']itll be just about 40% when obama doesnt renew the bush tax cuts. but how much will that help?[/quote]
I don't know. We'll see how well they dodge it.
yes, the EITC was raised to help the lower and middle class, part of those bush tax cuts everyone loves so much. and yes, having people pay a nontrivial amount of income tax is a moral victory. see friedman's four types of spending money.
Click to expand...
There's not a right answer here. I just disagree.
90% is reality, it was 90% until rich friendly kennedy came along.
Click to expand...
Marginal tax rates and effective tax rates are two different things. Here we go again with this very basic point of tax understanding.

Marginal rates shouldn't even be a part of the discussion. Effective is all that matters and is what the person means 99.99999999999999% of the time anyway.
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']itll be just about 40% when obama doesnt renew the bush tax cuts. but how much will that help?

ED-AH556B_ranso_20080519194014.gif



yes, the EITC was raised to help the lower and middle class, part of those bush tax cuts everyone loves so much. and yes, having people pay a nontrivial amount of income tax is a moral victory. see friedman's four types of spending money.


90% is reality, it was 90% until rich friendly kennedy came along.[/QUOTE]

Yet again you fail to mention that the top tier for 90% taxation was $16,000,000 dollars compared to todays top tier of $372,000 for 35%.

So let me get this straight you want to tax people that make over $372,000 at 90%? Ok so people that make $600,000 will be taxed at
$312559.24 dollars. So just income tax alone, the person will have to give away more than half of the money they earn. Then add in, state tax, medicare, social security. I live in New York, and with our tax rates he would have to pay another $40,000 in state taxes plus another $46,000 in medicare and social security taxes unless they are self employed. Then it would be another $92,000 dollars.

So to sum it up with a 90% top tier federal tax rate a person making $600,000 a year would pay:

Federal income tax of $312,559.24
New York State tax of $40,000
Social Security tax of $37,200 (employed) $74,000 (self-employed)
Medicare tax of $8,700 (employed) $17,400 (self-employed)
For a grand total of: $398,459.24 (employed) and $443,959.24

So the U.S. Government just left that person with a third (or less) of their earnings. But what does it matter, they can survive on $200,000 a year right?

I have an idea, why don't we have the government take all of the wealth, and give us each $50,000 a year. We can all survive on that right? One big happy country!
 
[quote name='Knoell']Yet again you fail to mention that the top tier for 90% taxation was $16,000,000 dollars compared to todays top tier of $372,000 for 35%.

So let me get this straight you want to tax people that make over $372,000 at 90%?[/quote]
No. He was just using it as an illustration.
I live in New York
Click to expand...
That's your own damn fault.
 
[quote name='speedracer']I don't know. We'll see how well they dodge it.

There's not a right answer here. I just disagree.

Marginal tax rates and effective tax rates are two different things. Here we go again with this very basic point of tax understanding.

Marginal rates shouldn't even be a part of the discussion. Effective is all that matters and is what the person means 99.99999999999999% of the time anyway.[/QUOTE]

looking over this thread it looks like marginal numbers are whats tossed around. i think thats what tossed around in most threads around here.
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']looking over this thread it looks like marginal numbers are whats tossed around. i think thats what tossed around in most threads around here.[/QUOTE]
I know. It drives me nuts. It makes the discussions a real pain in the ass.
 
[quote name='speedracer']No. He was just using it as an illustration.

That's your own damn fault.[/QUOTE]

He said that the 90% tax for the top tier was great before kennedy.

Secondly its my fault that I live in new york, a state that is heavily taxed? So you agree taxes are too high across the board?
 
[quote name='Knoell']He said that the 90% tax for the top tier was great before kennedy.[/quote]
Right. He wasn't advocating it.
Secondly its my fault that I live in new york, a state that is heavily taxed?
Click to expand...
Yes, and
So you agree taxes are too high across the board?
Click to expand...
No. My state income taxes are just fine, ya'll.
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']

90% is reality, it was 90% until rich friendly kennedy came along.[/QUOTE]

Hmm sure does sound like he is advocating it.

So you agree that the NY state tax rate is too high?

What state do you live in speedracer?
 
[quote name='perdition(troy']he's in texas[/QUOTE]


ah that was easy lol, thanks. Must be nice living in a state with no income tax....by the way speedracer are you advocating an income tax for your state?
 
[quote name='Knoell']ah that was easy lol, thanks. Must be nice living in a state with no income tax....[/quote]
Yes it is. I chose Texas after being born and raised in California and living in 7 other states.
by the way speedracer are you advocating an income tax for your state?
Click to expand...
We don't need one. We raise funds through consumption tax and property tax. It's regressive but it's how we choose to do it. We also limit the stupid by only allowing our state government to meet once every other year for 4 months. If it doesn't get done in that window, it doesn't get done (with rare exception that comes with political consequences for those that choose to use it).

Ya'll should try it sometime. It's pretty sweet.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Government is more corrupt than corporations?

Government doesn't sleep in the same bed, drink at the same bars, eat at the same restaurants, cheat on the same frigid wives with the same hookers and have their legitimate offspring skip to the front of the line as corporations?[/QUOTE]

I don't disagree that corporations are very corrupt (their designed to be) - but Government is the biggest and most powerful corporation.
 
[quote name='Knoell']I have an idea, why don't we have the government take all of the wealth, and give us each $50,000 a year. We can all survive on that right? One big happy country![/QUOTE]

Amen. I'm so sick of people complaining that the rich don't get taxed enough.
 
[quote name='speedracer']Yes it is. I chose Texas after being born and raised in California and living in 7 other states.

We don't need one. We raise funds through consumption tax and property tax. It's regressive but it's how we choose to do it. We also limit the stupid by only allowing our state government to meet once every other year for 4 months. If it doesn't get done in that window, it doesn't get done (with rare exception that comes with political consequences for those that choose to use it).

Ya'll should try it sometime. It's pretty sweet.[/QUOTE]

New York has one of the highest property taxes, sales tax, and income tax. Do you think the taxes as a whole in new york should be lower?

By the way, I agree Texas is a great example of most things done right.
 
[quote name='Knoell']New York has one of the highest property taxes, sales tax, and income tax. Do you think the taxes as a whole in new york should be lower?[/quote]
If the people of the state wanted differently then they'd vote it, right? We want no income tax so we vote that way. I don't wanna tell people from another state how to vote. :D
 
[quote name='cindersphere']Amendment 16 - Status of Income Tax Clarified
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.[/QUOTE]


That is not a law. Find the law.
 
[quote name='Archfiend'] That is not a law. Find the law.[/QUOTE]

Isn't the Constitution the supreme law of the land?
 
[quote name='IRHari']Isn't the Constitution the supreme law of the land?[/QUOTE]

Don't go down that road. It loops on itself several times.
I've read websites where they claim the 14th Amendment isn't considered legit because the South was forced to ratify it.
 
[quote name='javeryh']Amen. I'm so sick of people complaining that the rich don't get taxed enough.[/QUOTE]

What about a top tax rate of 70% only effecting people who make over something ridiculous like 20 million?
 
[quote name='Archfiend']That is not a law. Find the law.[/QUOTE]

It's called title 26 and has laws that state you need to file a return (even a second that specifies an income tax), when to pay it, and what income is taxable.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/6011.html

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/6012.html

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/6151.html

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/61.html

But most importantly, look at Al Capone. If it wasn't a crime, why did he die in jail? I am not a fan of taxes, but I am even less of a fan about being prosecuted by the United States Govt., and if they say it is a law to pay taxes, than I grudgingly give them my money and thank god I don't have to worry about dropping the soap. Unlike Wesley Snipes when they imprison him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top