Republicans think you don't pay enough tax.

[Newtons Bit]

Sounds like a reputable outfit

Yea, they're not completely unbiased. According to Wikipedia, some critics have described them as left-leaning, and it's sister organization, Citizens for Tax Justice, as downright progressive.

They're obviously trying to keep the lid on how regressive our tax scheme is.

 

[Newtons Bit]

Since words seem to be completely ignored, let's switch to pictures.

 

[000063]

Sounds like a reputable outfit

Do you have anything besides scoffing, bit_pattern? Because Sarge keeps making claims about taxes without backing them up. In fact, as Newton pointed out, he's made a claim that was outright false, which means that he either misread NB, or is outright lying. Hanlon's Razor would indicate the former.

 

[eeyore1954]

I am guessing at nothing, and you are ignoring some of the actual numbers - willfully or not.

You keep refering only to income taxes, federal, state, and local. So far, everything you have posted ignores sales and use taxes. A family of four subsisting on 35K a year and driving to work will be taxed on all 35K - 6.2% for Social Security, 5-7% in sales tax on food and clothes, and $.35 a gallon on gas. The poor spend their entire income on taxable, non-discretionary items. The wealthy do not.

We have a regressive Social Security tax, we have a regressive sales tax system, and we have a flat capital gains tax structure - also regressive in that only the relatively well off can take advantage of it. Add to that our relatively low income tax rates, and the wealthy (especially those making most of their money from investments) are getting a very good deal indeed.

Add a bracket to the income tax structure, taxing the very wealthy at a more normal 40-45%, eliminate the ceiling on income subject to social security taxes, raise the rate on capital gains (pegged to total income), and install a progressive sales and use tax structure. Then the wealthy will be paying their "fair share".

Sales tax is regressive but most states do not tax neccesities such as food, medicine and rent.
The capital gains tax is not flat. Although not very progressive either. But a married filing joint taxpayer pays zero federal taxes on capital gains up to around 70,000.

 

[Harte]

I suspect you're lying, as I'm looking at payin 2000 and I'm in the fourth quintile.

Well, I'm not lying. Why should I?

I have two kids and am a tenured teacher. My wife doesn't work because my youngest (12) is autistic.

I took only the standard deduction, since itemizing didn't amount to as much.

I qualified for the earned income credit (a small amount of it) with qualifying child.

Got back everything I paid in and more.

I could have done without that. Or, at least, done without the extra beyond what I had paid in.

Harte

 

[Harte]

I believe you have failed to read much of this thread. My "opponents" are ignoring total taxes and focusing on federal and state income taxes only. You got none of your Social Security taxes back. You almost certainly paid sales taxes. You probably paid some forms of use taxes. You did not escape paying taxes last year, period.

I haven't failed to read anything.

The thread is about Republicans wanting to extend the payroll tax cut for a year instead of two months. So, in a very real way, the premise of the thread (or, at least, the title) is completely bogus.

I brought up income tax on my own.

No Republican has (of course) intimated that they think we "don't pay enough tax."

I thought that my particular case might be of interest to those who are aware that almost half of America pays no income tax at all.

I realize that SS payroll tax has nothing to do with that. But neither does the Republican position have anything to do with the idea that we "don't pay enough tax."

I'll withdraw the information and start pretending it's not true, if that makes you feel better about it.

However, it is true, and I don't pay any taxes on a 40k per year teaching gig.

Harte

 

[DavidJames]

The thread is about Republicans wanting to extend the payroll tax cut for a year instead of two months.

If you think the only issue was a 2 month extension versus 1 year, then you really need to do more research. The difference was all about how to pay for it. Dem's wanted the rich to help fund while Repub's wanted to unemployed and federal workers to help fund.

Republicans also initially included the oil pipeline nonsense to which Obama agreed (caved).

 

[Harte]

It's not my thread, so I felt justified in providing a more compact synopsis than you, not having a morbid compulsion to list every fact on the matter and not operating under any requirements that might be considered to be the duty of the OP - explanation-wise.

Yes, I know many things are more complicated than can be expressed in a sentence or two.

Regardless, the hoo-haw certainly wasn't about some Republicans deciding we don't pay enough taxes.

Although I pay no Federal Income tax - and that could easily be interpreted as my not paying enough in taxes. I so consider it, anyway.

Now we've come full circle. You up for the next dance?

Harte

 

[BenBurch]

It was exactly about Republicans thinking we don't pay enough tax. Otherwise they wouldn't have thought paying more tax was a good bargaining chip.